What is your plan for re-opening?

[Headhunter]

This is why I'm teaching only 1 student right now. Instead of asking him to pay me, he will do the shopping for me. I have not been in grocery store since 3/1.

I prefer to take my risk against 1 person with face mask and social distance than to go to grocery store myself.

Okay mr miyagi what's his next lesson? Do your vacuuming lol

 

[jobo]

Okay mr miyagi what's his next lesson? Do your vacuuming lol

, now just check if this rat poison is safe to eat

 

[_Simon_]

whats clear to me is the 2 m rule they have tried to enforce in the UK is completely inadequate, when your going to stand 2 m from other people for an hour or more to get into the shop and are then going to interact with the check out staff at considerably less than 2 m, and received money that hasn't been sterilised

The measures implemented are meant to reduce likelihoods, there aren't any absolutes with them, nor guarantees being made. And yeah it's quite hard to apply the distance to everything... but the less distance the less chance of anything being transmitted. At alot of our supermarkets they've actually put a shield between check out staff and customer. But yeah, like I said it's just a game of reducing likelihoods of transmission.

But whether people actually comply is a whooole other issue [emoji14]

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is certainly reduced but six feet is by no means a magic number beyond which you are suddenly safe. So wearing a mask is still critical, and I am shocked every time I go to Target at how many people are not wearing masks, both employees and customers. If people are not wearing a mask, droplets can become airborn and travel much farther than six feet, and if people are “loud talkers” or are singing or coughing or sneezing, it can travel much farther than that.

So yeah, reducing the capacity by 50% helps, but things like wearing masks is still critical and it all remains far from a guarantee.

Yeah, and it amazes me when I hear someone (and I've heard folks saying this out loud at stores I've been in) that all the people in masks are just scared of nothing. They don't realize that my mask does almost nothing to protect me. I wear it because when delivering I come in contact with at least a dozen people every day. I'm more likely to be a carrier than the average person in the store. My mask is in case I'm infected, so I don't spread it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

that has certain vagueness in it , how many people are usually in the store, what the density of those people and how much room do the other people give you ?

and by how much is your risk reduced /

this is rhetorical, you clearly cant answer as you dont know, but then neither does anybody else, making claims its had any noticeable effect on the death impossible to substantiate


whats clear to me is the 2 m rule they have tried to enforce in the UK is completely inadequate, when your going to stand 2 m from other people for an hour or more to get into the shop and are then going to interact with the check out staff at considerably less than 2 m, and received money that hasn't been sterilised

and whilst large supermarkets, may be able to put some controls in place, the extended queuing they have set up has driven people to shop at small local stores that dont have the means to set up entry control or enough room to allow any distancing to take place for the increased volume of people, they have taken a relatively low risk environment and moved the problem to multiple high risk environments, quite possibly greatly increasing the deaths>? but almost certainly negating any benefits the supermarket controls have given

the science may be good, the application of that science is some what different

I can't answer, but epidemiologists can. They have models that can demonstrate pretty clearly how much the risk of transmission is reduced. 2m (essentially the same as the US 6-foot rule) is a minimum, and not nearly sufficient when people are singing, talking loudly, or breathing hard. It's meant to reduce the risk of transmission in brief interactions.

The money is a bit of a concern, though the CDC in the US has recently revised their guidance, stating that transmission on surfaces is less risk than previously thought, so that money is less of a problem than I'd thought (I'd stopped using cash for that reason).

Yeah, folks going to places where they can't distance is problematic. In the US, some of the bigger stores are worse - the Walmarts around here look like the final shopping days before Chrismas, with packed parking lots. I won't go near them.

 

[jobo]

I can't answer, but epidemiologists can. They have models that can demonstrate pretty clearly how much the risk of transmission is reduced. 2m (essentially the same as the US 6-foot rule) is a minimum, and not nearly sufficient when people are singing, talking loudly, or breathing hard. It's meant to reduce the risk of transmission in brief interactions.

The money is a bit of a concern, though the CDC in the US has recently revised their guidance, stating that transmission on surfaces is less risk than previously thought, so that money is less of a problem than I'd thought (I'd stopped using cash for that reason).

Yeah, folks going to places where they can't distance is problematic. In the US, some of the bigger stores are worse - the Walmarts around here look like the final shopping days before Chrismas, with packed parking lots. I won't go near them.

well no they cant, not out side of a strictly theoretical sence, what more of a risk, passing very briefly at a meter or standing their for an hour and a half adjacent to an infected person at two meters,, personally id rather just hold my breath whilst im passing for 3 seconds, than have them firing droplets at me for 90 mins

the length of exposure MUST be a major factor in how likely you are to become infected , which has just been totally ignored in the UK, in fact the measures ensure that long exposures are a regular and constant issue

6 foot is not a min um., its NOT a safe distance for breath borne aerosols, just with normal breathing, never mind singing, that will hang in the air anyway, so when the queue moves up, your just walking into someone else exhaust products or if there a breeze you will get them 30 foot-away or more


and as i explained, the law of unintended consequences apply, by forcing people into more confined spaces, when they want to buy some gravy and havent got hours to spare

there also the economic divided, people with out cars cant do a weeks shopping in one go,, they cant use public transport to get to supper markets so local shopping in confined spaces is their only recourse. there been some comment here that ethnic minorities are more adversely effected, at least part of that will be the economic divided that exists. or it probably truer that poor people are worse effected. i walk two miles home ( after jogging the two miles there) three times a week with my shopping in a very heavy rucksack, not every one can do that

so, practicality is being used rather than science and its also having the opposite effect that the intent

SO,, its far from certain the social distancing controls are having any possessive effect on the death toll

 

[Flying Crane]

I can't answer, but epidemiologists can. They have models that can demonstrate pretty clearly how much the risk of transmission is reduced. 2m (essentially the same as the US 6-foot rule) is a minimum, and not nearly sufficient when people are singing, talking loudly, or breathing hard. It's meant to reduce the risk of transmission in brief interactions.

The money is a bit of a concern, though the CDC in the US has recently revised their guidance, stating that transmission on surfaces is less risk than previously thought, so that money is less of a problem than I'd thought (I'd stopped using cash for that reason).

Yeah, folks going to places where they can't distance is problematic. In the US, some of the bigger stores are worse - the Walmarts around here look like the final shopping days before Chrismas, with packed parking lots. I won't go near them.

It is insane, what we are seeing in some parts of the US. Some people are being downright confrontational and belligerent about it, getting in peoples faces and invading their space, deliberately trying to spark an incident.

Those kinds of assholes deserve a state-sanctioned execution.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

well no they cant, not out side of a strictly theoretical sence, what more of a risk, passing very briefly at a meter or standing their for an hour and a half adjacent to an infected person at two meters,, personally id rather just hold my breath whilst im passing for 3 seconds, than have them firing droplets at me for 90 mins

the length of exposure MUST be a major factor in how likely you are to become infected , which has just been totally ignored in the UK, in fact the measures ensure that long exposures are a regular and constant issue

You think their models don't have the ability to account for time of exposure? Dude.

6 foot is not a min um., its NOT a safe distance for breath borne aerosols, just with normal breathing, never mind singing, that will hang in the air anyway, so when the queue moves up, your just walking into someone else exhaust products or if there a breeze you will get them 30 foot-away or more

You seem to be confusing "minimum" with "minimum safe". You are correct that aerosols can pass far beyond that point (what I've seen suggests 20 feet isn't unusual). Droplets drop off dramatically at 3 feet, and are (except from sneezes, apparently) barely signficant at 6 feet.

and as i explained, the law of unintended consequences apply, by forcing people into more confined spaces, when they want to buy some gravy and havent got hours to spare

there also the economic divided, people with out cars cant do a weeks shopping in one go,, they cant use public transport to get to supper markets so local shopping in confined spaces is their only recourse. there been some comment here that ethnic minorities are more adversely effected, at least part of that will be the economic divided that exists. or it probably truer that poor people are worse effected. i walk two miles home ( after jogging the two miles there) three times a week with my shopping in a very heavy rucksack, not every one can do that

so, practicality is being used rather than science and its also having the opposite effect that the intent

SO,, its far from certain the social distancing controls are having any possessive effect on the death toll

You seem to confuse science with some absolute thing. Yes, there are unintended consequences. Evidence from before stay-at-home orders suggests that the small areas of brief crowding you refer to are far less of a problem than large, crowded stores and bars were earlier. Something doesn't have to work absolutely to be effective.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is insane, what we are seeing in some parts of the US. Some people are being downright confrontational and belligerent about it, getting in peoples faces and invading their space, deliberately trying to spark an incident.

Those kinds of assholes deserve a state-sanctioned execution.

There has been at least one murder by someone who didn't like being told they had to wear a mask or leave.

I really don't get why folks see this as a freedom issue. It's a pretty simple, easy act to wear a mask to protect others. I have the option not to in most places, and choose to anyway.

 

[jobo]

You think their models don't have the ability to account for time of exposure? Dude.


You seem to be confusing "minimum" with "minimum safe". You are correct that aerosols can pass far beyond that point (what I've seen suggests 20 feet isn't unusual). Droplets drop off dramatically at 3 feet, and are (except from sneezes, apparently) barely signficant at 6 feet.


You seem to confuse science with some absolute thing. Yes, there are unintended consequences. Evidence from before stay-at-home orders suggests that the small areas of brief crowding you refer to are far less of a problem than large, crowded stores and bars were earlier. Something doesn't have to work absolutely to be effective.

you keep telling me what these models contain as if youve seen them

they can of course account for time of exposure, my point is they either didnt or the UK government has ignored them, other wise no one could buy food. if clothing shops are to dangerous to be open, then so are food shops, that of course would lead to starvation and or riots, which would be more of a problem than the disease, that however doesnt make it anywhere near safe, just pragmatic



droplets in breath are aerosols, its the very definition of an aerosol, the larger ones may drop off quickly but the smaller one carrying the virus will quite happy float around for some time, unless you claiming the virus is to heavy to float ?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

you keep telling me what these models contain as if youve seen them

they can of course account for time of exposure, my point is they either didnt or the UK government has ignored them, other wise no one could buy food. if clothing shops are to dangerous to be open, then so are food shops, that of course would lead to starvation and or riots, which would be more of a problem than the disease, that however doesnt make it anywhere near safe, just pragmatic

Yes, there is some pragmatism applied. That doesn't preclude the use of scientific information, as well. You're probably aware that there's science showing that starvation is bad for people.

droplets in breath are aerosols, its the very definition of an aerosol, the larger ones may drop off quickly but the smaller one carrying the virus will quite happy float around for some time, unless you claiming the virus is to heavy to float ?

There's a specific distinction made between droplets (which fall from the air rather quickly) and aeorsolized particles (which float on the air for a much longer time). That distinction is made by scientists discussing the issue, so take it up with them.

 

[Flying Crane]

There has been at least one murder by someone who didn't like being told they had to wear a mask or leave.

I really don't get why folks see this as a freedom issue. It's a pretty simple, easy act to wear a mask to protect others. I have the option not to in most places, and choose to anyway.

Yeah. This is not difficult to understand. Masks help slow and prevent the spread of the virus. End of story. This is critical for the economy to open, which is what people seem to be hell-bent on making happen, for better or for worse.

People are deliberately turning it into a political issue. Stupidity, plain and simple.

 

[jobo]

Yes, there is some pragmatism applied. That doesn't preclude the use of scientific information, as well. You're probably aware that there's science showing that starvation is bad for people.




There's a specific distinction made between droplets (which fall from the air rather quickly) and aeorsolized particles (which float on the air for a much longer time). That distinction is made by scientists discussing the issue, so take it up with them.

your the one claiming to be in the know, so im taking it up with you, liquid, otherwise know as drop lets in air is an aerosol ( its a liquid or a PARTICLE), it stays in suspension for a considerable amount of time, it is of course heavier than air, but air currents will carry it upwards or sideways for a considerable distance, great big globs of flem will fall rather soon in time, but not in three feet if its coughed or sneezed at you, 30 feet more like, i have a vague memory of being told at school sneezes travel at 100 mph, ive never bother to google but wouldn't be surprised if it got in to three figures, so it will travel that 30 foot rather quickly

if scientist are telling you its safe they are lieing to you, they seem to have spent a lot of time misleading people over this issue in general

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

you appear to be exploiting your student to increase their risk of infection in return for lessons, if its safe for him to do your shopping its equally safe for you to do it yourself

I don't ask my student to make a special shopping trip for me. Every time my student go to grocery store, he asks me what do I need.

I tried to order grocery delivering but most of the time they only delivered 1/2 of the order. My student just help me to pick up the 1/2 missing items.

 

[jobo]

your the one claiming to be in the know, so im taking it up with you, liquid, otherwise know as drop lets in air is an aerosol ( its a liquid or a PARTICLE), it stays in suspension for a considerable amount of time, it is of course heavier than air, but air currents will carry it upwards or sideways for a considerable distance, great big globs of flem will fall rather soon in time, but not in three feet if its coughed or sneezed at you, 30 feet more like, i have a vague memory of being told at school sneezes travel at 100 mph, ive never bother to google but wouldn't be surprised if it got in to three figures, so it will travel that 30 foot rather quickly

if scientist are telling you its safe they are lieing to you, they seem to have spent a lot of time misleading people over this issue in general

the latest ''scare'' in the UK is that petrol pumps are acting as a vector for infection, which seems reasonable, though you think they might have mentioned it a couple of months ago.

which then goes on to make you think about supermarket trolleys and shop door handles and tins of beans and money etc

 

[jobo]

I don't ask my student to make a special shopping trip for me. Every time my student go to grocery store, he asks me what do I need.

I tried to order grocery delivering but most of the time they only delivered 1/2 of the order. My student just help me to pick up the 1/2 missing items.

see post above about possible contamination of food stuffs

 

[jobo]

There has been at least one murder by someone who didn't like being told they had to wear a mask or leave.

I really don't get why folks see this as a freedom issue. It's a pretty simple, easy act to wear a mask to protect others. I have the option not to in most places, and choose to anyway.

do face masks actual work, its a genuine question, its seems logical they might, but is it an actual fact.

here an article in the new scientist that throws doubt at that conclusion.

in short it seems ''genuine'' medical masks that are disposed of after each use, are better than the cloth ones lots of people are wearing, but the evidence for either is patchy rather dubious and far from conclusive. at which point they can give people a false sense of security and make matters worse

Do face masks work against the coronavirus and should you wear one?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

the latest ''scare'' in the UK is that petrol pumps are acting as a vector for infection, which seems reasonable, though you think they might have mentioned it a couple of months ago.

which then goes on to make you think about supermarket trolleys and shop door handles and tins of beans and money etc

I'd be interested in finding out if that's true. It's in direct conflict with the recent findings by the US CDC, who said hard surfaces aren't a significant risk for transmission.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

do face masks actual work, its a genuine question, its seems logical they might, but is it an actual fact.

here an article in the new scientist that throws doubt at that conclusion.

in short it seems ''genuine'' medical masks that are disposed of after each use, are better than the cloth ones lots of people are wearing, but the evidence for either is patchy rather dubious and far from conclusive. at which point they can give people a false sense of security and make matters worse

Do face masks work against the coronavirus and should you wear one?

I read that (and similar articles) back when that came out. It's discussing protection from incoming transmission, and ther's pretty good evidence they don't work well for that - including the medical-grade stuff, when worn by folks not used to wearing a mask (they tend to touch the mask a lot).

The recommendation to wear a mask is based on results looking at outward transmission. If I am infected and cough, talk loud, etc. near you, my mask dramatically reduces what I put in the air for you to breathe in. The better the mask, the smaller the stuff it blocks. Oddly, the N95 (medical-grade) masks with valves are counter-productive for this - they sem to transmit further because of how the air flows out the valve.

 

[Flying Crane]

I'd be interested in finding out if that's true. It's in direct conflict with the recent findings by the US CDC, who said hard surfaces aren't a significant risk for transmission.

I would be very careful with this issue. In my opinion, I suspect people are being less clear with the language than they ought to be, and that has the risk of people erroneously believing that they don’t need to takes steps to guard against transmission from surfaces. I believe that surface transmission is an issue, just not as likely as once thought. But that does not mean that one shouldn’t take reasonable steps to safeguard against it.

A little common sense is in order. Let’s take a scenario where an infectious individual sneezes and droplets fall on the countertop, and is not cleaned or disinfected. Five minutes later someone else walks by, pauses for a moment and puts his hand on the countertop while checking his cell phone, scratches the corner of his lip or rubs his nose with the same hand he touched the countertop with while he continues to ponder his phone, and then moves on. I’m gonna suggest that fellow is probably now infected. There is nothing magical about a countertop that kills the virus and prevents infection.

There may be issues regarding how long the virus remains viable while sitting on the countertop, that may reduce the likelihood of transmission. Perhaps it is not viable for a long time, but I don’t know. Maybe it is viable for a half hour but not after three hours, or remains viable as long as the droplets remain wet, but not once it dries out, for example (pure speculation on my part, this is a hypothetical not based on any facts that I am aware of). There are also issues around frequently touched items like doorknobs or elevator buttons, that may be a more likely vector of infection.

But my point is, I think people need to be clear that while infection from touching surfaces may be less likely, it does not mean that it is not of concern. The CDC guidelines do not say “transmission from hard surfaces is not possible, so don’t concern yourself with it.”