Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

OK, the Corona Virus Isn't Going Away. Now What?


Recommended Posts

<...snip...>

 

Airborne transmission occurs when infectious agents are carried by dust or droplet nuclei suspended in air. [/b]<...>

 

So COVID is capable of Airborne transmission even though it's classification is Droplet.

 

The way I think I understand it is we are talking about two different things, Airborne Transmission and an Airborne Disease.

 

Airborne Transmission includes both Airborne Diseases and Droplet Diseases (with small droplets). The difference seems to be the range.

 

Correct? Or am I misunderstanding?

 

So when someone says, "I'm not wearing a mask because COVID-19 is not an airborne disease." a person could counter with, "You are technically correct but it is still capable of airborne transmission"

 

Either way, wear your mask to protect yourself, and more importantly, to protect others. After all in a civilized society you have a responsibility not to inadvertently harm others.

 

Notes

 

Well, I think the CDC info does not directly address the issue - it's just a set of preliminary definitions and classifications. Where any specific disease lands in the classification is not mentioned, except for the one example given regarding measles. I posted it up to show the complexity of the issue and, not to plug the CDC as infallible, but they are true authorities on all this, plus calling the shots. So their take seems to me to be a good place for us amateurs to begin.

 

The majority of articles I've read (and I'll read anything with a modicum of authority) infer that it's not droplet nuclei that is the big carrier of COVID-19. The droplet nuclei are described as dry and can be suspended in the air, blown around, etc. The non-airborne type of COVID-19 per the CDCs classification scheme, meaning the big, wet droplets that fall to the ground in a short space, gets all the focus as the mechanism by which it's generally transmitted, and it's the mechanism we can do something about individually easily enough.

 

But, yeah, it doesn't say anything like "COVID-19 is never transmitted as dry droplet nuclei". Maybe it can get around to some extent that way, too. But it seems the public health people are not focusing on that possibility, so I infer it's not much of an issue.

 

The public always wants things reduced to binaries, "is it or isn't it" sorts of statements. The reality is so often more nuanced than that.

 

From J Dan's posts, however, now I'm wondering if this rather basic issue of how COVID-19 is transmitted is highly controversial among scientists? If so, can someone point me to names or articles where this issue is treated from a significantly different angle? J Dan is mysteriously silent on specifics as to who is disagreeing with whom and seems, if I understand him, to imply that we all look foolish trying to understand these complex issues. Well, I'm ok with looking foolish as long as I'm on a trajectory from ignorance to being well-informed. I do like to learn from a variety of sources and not subscribe to any single source as infallible.

 

nat

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

<...snip...>

 

Airborne transmission From J Dan's posts, however, now I'm wondering if this rather basic issue of how COVID-19 is transmitted is highly controversial among scientists?

nat

 

As far as airbourne vs direct contact/droplet transmission goes, that doesn't seem to be controversial at all, except on musicians internet forums. But please, nobody contradict me..I don't want my holiday to be ruined by the shame of losing an an argument on the internet. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have there been outright screw ups? Yes. But I don't see the point in bashing people with good intent as long as they learn from it and move on. News sources have their issues, but what doesn't? We are all humans and all imperfect.

Agreed. My intent wasn't to bash anyone; but as we are imperfect humans, no one's information will be completely trustworthy.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

My Blue Someday appears on Apple Music | Spotify | YouTube | Amazon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"In the scientific world, it is expected that even the highest academics will evolve their thinking. But some scientists fear that the public doesn't understand this, and is losing it's faith in scientists that change their minds"- wretchcardthecat

 

I agree, it makes no sense to bash scientists who change their minds as they get more data and info. It would make more sense to be skeptical of scientists who never change their minds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole point of science is a continuing evolution of the best explanation to date.

 

If scientists didn't change their minds, then their entire enterprise will have ground to a halt.

 

People like absolutes, which can be compartmentalized and left to harden like old wood in some old storage space of the mind, unvisited and left for the heirs to clean out.

 

nat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and I'm sure you'll be blinded by this one. It looks like hydroxychloroquine is back in the game after the WHO dropped all studies of it.

 

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext

 

The Henry Ford hospital system in Michigan has found a significant reduction in deaths. 2,541 patients a pretty good group of people, it's not 30,000 but it's better than 40. it's getting to the point we can't trust who to bad mouth any more. Yes. No. No. Yes. Ohhhh,,,wait. Oh, OK, Yes.

 

I think this virus is a tricky SOB to nail down.

 

 

This is crazy. No matter what I do the link will not show as active in the forum. You have to copy and paste it into a browser then it comes up.

 

Bob

Hammond SK1, Mojo 61, Kurzweil PC3, Korg Pa3x, Roland FA06, Band in a Box, Real Band, Studio One, too much stuff...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all that, it turns out it might be airborne after all. (The airborne vs. droplet described above. If you think you are confused, check out the comments about the W.H.O. in this article.)

 

239 Experts With 1 Big Claim: The Coronavirus Is Airborne

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all that, it turns out it might be airborne after all. (The airborne vs. droplet described above. If you think you are confused, check out the comments about the W.H.O. in this article.)

 

239 Experts With 1 Big Claim: The Coronavirus Is Airborne

 

 

Yeah, I just saw the NYTimes article on the scientists/experts writing to the W.H.O. to chide them for not acknowledging the airborne method of transmission to the public.

 

I need to read the related articles in depth - I have lots of questions, such as what's the relative likliehood of transmission via the two methods? Is the airborne variety possible but negligible?

 

There is a definite issue of paternalism going on with all this that is creating a lot of the confusion in the public. The whole kerfuffel about "do we wear masks or not" back at the onset was, as far as I can tell, caused by public health voices holding some information back because they were trying to anticipate what words they should say publicly that would result in the best outcome in public response.

 

The idea of airborne is a lot scarier than the falling droplet idea to the average person. I have no specific knowledge about the intentions of the W.H.O. on all this, but I can imagine a public health communicator not wanting to create crazy responses among the public because the public takes the disemminated info and advice and misunderstands it, or alters it, or gets it only half-right, and rarely has a reliable sense of scale about relative dangers. So a spin factor comes into play via the public health communicators, and that dynamic creates fierce voices in opposition, and all sorts of muddle.

 

Due to the tentative and developing status of the science dealing with all this, a key distinction is how to respond to, as it were, the lack of information. I mean a situtation where "there is no clear evidence" to either declare safety or to declare danger. A more paternalistic type will tend to declare "there's no known degree of safety here", while a more pragmatic type will declare there's no proof of danger, hence, some assumed safety. The public gets really confused caught between these spin tendencies.

 

Oy.

 

nat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I just wish sometimes people would say "We don't know." I think not saying anything is better than saying something fallacious. The other phrase I like to use, if applicable, is "can't hurt, could help." Wearing a mask is a perfect example of that. When people starting asking whether wearing a mask would prevent spread of the virus, probably the best answer would have been "We don't know. It can't hurt, and could help. We'll let you know when we have a definitive answer."

 

The one thing that's for certain is we don't know enough. For example, the WHO now says the death rate is probably under 1%, but that 20% of people who get it require hospitalization. So you can indeed say it's not a problem for 99% of the people if you to equate "problem" solely with dying, but if you equate problem with "stretching hospitals to the max, infecting health care workers, and probably getting your body pretty messed up," that's a different story.

 

Zooming out...I don't see the music industry recovering any time soon. The short-term problem is obvious, but long-term, disposable income is going to be scarce for a while. Besides, after musicians find that when they started doing Grub Hub or Uber Eats because they couldn't get gigs, and they ended up making more money delivering food, they might decide on a career change :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's blinding me with science.

 

and hit you with technology. :D

 

What a coincidence, Dave... I was just comparing video of Akiko Yano playing with YMO live in 79, with the Thomas Dolby video, to try to verify an old rumor that "Miss Sakamoto" in the video was Yano herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's frustrating to me that musicians have, for the most part, been unable to find support in some sort of patronage mechanism. Youtube channels, at least some of them like Rick Beato and That Pedal Show and Warren Huart and Pete Thorn and a small nation of others, seem to have found some source of income via patronage. (Patreon, etc.).

 

But music always get shuffled off to the mass-distributors who drive down the market value, skim off the top and middle and leave some portion of the bottom to the actual musicians.

 

Why is it that so many actual direct producers of good things in our culture get beat out by the money-making organizational types, managers, handlers, shareholders, etc etc who take the honey and toss the comb back to the bees to fill it up for them again?

 

nat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's in fact airborne then all these cloth masks are doing NOTHING. The idea of the masks were to stop droplets. They do nothing for an airborne virus. Nothing.

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But until we know for sure, they aren't hurting anything, and they could be helping.

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's in fact airborne then all these cloth masks are doing NOTHING. The idea of the masks were to stop droplets. They do nothing for an airborne virus. Nothing.

 

Well, wait a minute - there's a very important question of percentages, isn't there? What if 90% of the virus exposures are caused by wet droplets (not airborne) and 10% are caused by dry nuclei (airborne)? Masks would take care of the vast majority of potential exposures.

 

The airborne variety of COVID-10 transmission is by no means "everywhere" - the studies talk about specific situations where it's possible the virus could be transmitted via an airborne mechanism. No one is saying the airborne type is the main way it's transmitted.

 

It's not a binary - either all airborne or all not airborne. Apparently it's some large majority not airborne, and some smaller percentage airborne. I just wish we know how the percentages actually break down. But the airborne situations seem harder to nail down as they are so context-sensitive. The non-airborne situation is pretty much 6' most everywhere unless you're sneezing into a fan or something.

 

Masks still make sense to me. I'm open to being talked out of that, as I don't like wearing them at all.

 

nat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest we all err on the side of caution and put the masks on. Really, they are no big deal. It's a piece of cloth that doesn't hurt. Plus it keeps those invasive facial recognition cameras from logging your movements. :D

 

The likelihood of our house catching fire is slight, but we buy insurance.

 

The likelihood of getting hit by lightning is slight, but we seek shelter during violent storms.

 

The likelihood of needing a gun to defend yourself is slight, but millions buy them anyway.

 

I could go on.

 

There are plenty of things that cause us to choose to err on the side of caution. Shouldn't death or even more likely permanent brain, heart, lung, kidney and/or other major organ damage be one of them?

 

Plus in the event that a person is an asymptomatic carrier and likely to cause death or damage to others he/she passes in the street, isn't it the civil thing to do to wear a mask?

 

It shouldn't be a political thing and we shouldn't be taking advice from politicians or religious leaders about this, but the peer-reviewed, published, scientists, and they recommend masks almost unanimously.

 

 

Insights and incites by Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with masks is we're just not being creative enough. Ladies and gentlemen...an important leak from an Apple insider...the iMask!

 

EcmDGoz.jpg

 

The heads-up display on the front screen gives you walking and driving directions, weather, the latest news, and more! Compact audio speakers present a beautiful surround sound experience, so you can listen to your favorite music while you remote distance. Climate control keeps your head at a constant 72 degrees, with 43% relative humidity, year-round. But wait!! There's more! iMask syncs with your Apple Watch or iPhone so that you can use the built-in, high-quality microphone to converse with your contacts, and also, see text messages or Zoom conferences on the heads-up display.

 

Yes, it's the iMask! A way to protect yourself - and others - that's so luxurious, so high-tech, and so innovative you'll want to wear it ALL the time!

 

(The iMask will be available in your local Apple store starting August 1. Reserve yours now!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also the question of viral loading. When the virus is exhaled into the air it disperses and dies off - especially outdoor when exposed to UV light. If you wear a mask, you're trapping it in the mask where it continues to build up over time. You touch your face on average about 15 times an hour. If a restaurant worker wears a mask for an 8 hour shift, adjusts his mask, then handles your food, is that better or worse than it just dispersing? Of course the answer in that scenario would be gloves, and to change the gloves between every interaction with a different person, or hand sanitizer between contact with each person. Everybody's focussed on mask everywhere all the time, just do it or you're killing grandma vs no mask ever, screw you. I'll say what I've been saying over and over for months - just use a little common sense. Yes it's a new strain, but it transmits just like every other corona virus we've encountered.

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK now that COVID is proven to be both an airborne and droplet disease, plus it can linger on surfaces, there is no reason to not wear a mask and be careful touching objects.

 

Plus there is every reason to wear a mask. If you are a carrier without symptoms, you could be killing people (think Typhoid Mary).

 

IMO the "I'm not wearing a mask" people no longer have an excuse. If you are infected, breathing your own germs won't make you more infected. If you are infected and wearing a mask, you won't be killing other people. If you aren't infected the mask could possibly keep you from getting sick.

 

It's not a matter of politics. Don't listen to what "news" pundits, preachers, real estate salesmen, anti-science folks, FB/Twitter bots, extremists, or anybody else other that respected, peer-reviewed scientists say, and right now they are virtually all saying we should wear a mask.

 

If you don't, you are saying, "I don't care if I kill you or not, I don't want to put a simple piece of cloth in front of my nose and mouth, and my comfort is more important than your very life." This is what other people will think of you.

 

To be reasonably safe:

 

Put the mask on before you get to the first stop that could be hazardous, and don't touch it or take it off until you get home. Then remove it by the straps before you get inside. Leilani and I hang it on the clothesline for one day before washing it. The UV from the Florida sun helps.

 

Wear disposable gloves before touching anything. Take them off before touching your car and dispose of them in a bin. New gloves for the next stop if there is one,

 

Bring a small bottle of alcohol (70%) and when you take your credit card out of the reader.

 

Take your outer clothes off and hang them outdoors for a day. Leave your shoes outside.

 

And of course, wash your hands before you touch your face. (This one is hard for me because of itchy tear ducts, but when wearing the mask, it reminds me to just grin and bear it.)

 

These practices can either eliminate or greatly reduce your exposure.

 

If a few virus particles get through your defenses, most likely your immune system will be able to handle them. If you get a large number of them, it could overwhelm your defenses.

 

Rather than argue points about not protecting yourself and others, use your brain power to concentrate on all the ways you can protect yourself and others. It's the civilized thing go do.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a restaurant worker wears a mask for an 8 hour shift, adjusts his mask, then handles your food, is that better or worse than it just dispersing?

 

If the question is are you safer with surface borne than airborne virus particles, my understanding is surface borne would be less of a threat. You still have to get enough of them in your nose to become infected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In California all restaurants require servers and food handlers to wear disposable gloves and this has been for several years now, way before the virus. I don't know about other states but after the virus hit I think it's a safe assumption that most of not all states now require food handlers to wear those gloves and to change them frequently. For example every time I would stop at a Subway, McD's or any other fast food place they have a box of those gloves hanging on the wall right next to the food and they put on, throw away and put on new again for every customer. These are not the nice, washable latex gloves, these are the very cheap, disposable clear plastic ones. And, I'll bet they're not wearing the same mask all day either. There doesn't appear to be any shortage of disposable masks now so they could be changing masks every hour or something. Retail price on Amazon right now for a pack of 50 is $25 with free shipping with Prime. A business is probably buying those 1,000 or more at a time for a lower unit cost than $.50.

 

Notes is right, just wear the mask. Sorry to be so blunt but all these people refusing to wear masks is really stupid now. I mean seriously, what else do they think is causing these huge spikes in cases and hospitalizations? Aliens?

 

Bob

Hammond SK1, Mojo 61, Kurzweil PC3, Korg Pa3x, Roland FA06, Band in a Box, Real Band, Studio One, too much stuff...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that the authorities have backed off somewhat on surface transmission. Are there actually documented cases, other than rare ones, of people contracting COVID like that? I hope not because Saturday night I am playing a gig on harmonica (1st time ever for that but a gig's a gig) and a "tin sandwich" has to be the most disease-"inciting" instrument ever, there's no way to do it without continually touching your face. Maybe they should be outlawed in public.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...