CDC Director: Impending Doom

[akl432]

I still think that if people don't want to get the vaccine, they need to wear a mask all the time they are in public, even if it's just as a courtesy to others.

The virus particles are much smaller than the size of the holes in the masks. It's just safety theater.

 

[KingAugie]

The virus particles are much smaller than the size of the holes in the masks. It's just safety theater.

My SIL caught it while she was working as a server wearing a mask.

 

[snappy]

Are two masks more effective, like a 3 layer cotton mask that fits close over the face over a paper 3 layer surgical mask? Asking for a friend.

 

[Christine]

Are two masks more effective, like a 3 layer cotton mask that fits close over the face over a paper 3 layer surgical mask? Asking for a friend.

Here's a recent article on masks. You should be able to access the article. I think the WaPo had all COVID articles accessible without a subscription.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/scie...f0b096-88f2-11eb-82bc-e58213caa38e_story.html

 

[Christine]

My SIL caught it while she was working as a server wearing a mask.

You do know that your mask has a low level protection level for YOU. She likely caught it because someone she was serving did NOT have a mask on. It can get in through YOUR mask, especially if it's not an effective one, as well as your eyes. The mask's purpose is to block COVID particles that come out of an infected person's mouth all wrapped up in their mucous/breath vapors. Those particles are much bigger on exhalation than the particles that disperse into the air, break up, and then drift over to someone else. Masks, overall, are not 100%.

 

[ShirikiUtundu]

The virus particles are much smaller than the size of the holes in the masks. It's just safety theater.

The droplets that carry most of the virus particles expelled by a person's nose or mouth are not though.

 

[RamblingMad]

Are two masks more effective, like a 3 layer cotton mask that fits close over the face over a paper 3 layer surgical mask? Asking for a friend.

This is what my significant other wears. Info about double masking being more effective came out a while ago.

https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...g-for-more-protection-against-the-coronavirus

 

[KingAugie]

You do know that your mask has a low level protection level for YOU. She likely caught it because someone she was serving did NOT have a mask on. It can get in through YOUR mask, especially if it's not an effective one, as well as your eyes. The mask's purpose is to block COVID particles that come out of an infected person's mouth all wrapped up in their mucous/breath vapors. Those particles are much bigger on exhalation than the particles that disperse into the air, break up, and then drift over to someone else. Masks, overall, are not 100%.

Yes I do know that, I was just commenting because IMO that falls under the "it's all theater". She was in her place of employment, they require guests to wear masks when they aren't at their table. They are allowed to take them off though when they are sitting at the table. People are still catching it from those people. It's all theater.
If an unvaccinated person should have to wear a mask when he or she is out as the pp suggests, but goes to a venue that allows no mask (even for just some part of the time they are there) then it isn't going to make a difference. Theater.

 

[Christine]

Yes I do know that, I was just commenting because IMO that falls under the "it's all theater". She was in her place of employment, they require guests to wear masks when they aren't at their table. They are allowed to take them off though when they are sitting at the table. People are still catching it from those people. It's all theater.
If an unvaccinated person should have to wear a mask when he or she is out as the pp suggests, but goes to a venue that allows no mask then it isn't going to make a difference. Theater.

Oh, I see. Yeah, I agree. It is theater in the indoor dining situation. Once you allow masks to be removed then it all goes out the window. I think it's pretty risky to be a server.

 

[Tiggerette]

The virus particles are much smaller than the size of the holes in the masks. It's just safety theater.

Home experiment:
- Try not wearing a mask and blowing out a candle at least arms length away. Notice how far away the candle is when you blow it out.
- Then, put on a mask (any kind that is acceptable at Disney, for example). Try blowing out the candle from the same distance while wearing the mask. How close does the candle need to get to your masked face till it's blown out? If it's never blown out, why is that?

The use of the masks in the everyday setting is about physics of air movement. It's not about creating a sterile surgical or research environment. It's not just about virology; physics deserves some marquee sized attention. (Like Bill Nye Science Guy fun home experiments.)

 

[DisneyOma]

First, nobody said 100% effective. Second, this is NEW information. Pfizer has 95% efficacy overall (not including variants), but now also has 90% protection against getting it all. Those are two different stats. Did you read the CDC release at all? If you had, you’d see all of this.

Someone did say that, from the CDC: https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-director-data-vaccinated-people-do-not-carry-covid-19-2021-3

 

[KingAugie]

Oh, I see. Yeah, I agree. It is theater in the indoor dining situation. Once you allow masks to be removed then it all goes out the window. I think it's pretty risky to be a server.

I should have been more clear in my post. It is risky but people need to work. She didn't have a serious case, and she didn't spread it to the people she lives with. So, I guess that is good.

 

[neverlandsky]

The virus can also enter through the eyes route. Studies found that people wearing glasses were 3 times less likely to get Covid.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

The virus can also enter through the eyes route. Studies found that people wearing glasses were 3 times less likely to get Covid.

Halfway joking but point 1 for me being so lazy all these months and rarely wearing my contacts

 

[GAN]

So do surgeons still need to wear masks?? Asking for a friend...

 

[LuvOrlando]

I explained this on a thread a few months past. Statistically speaking the chances that someone will catch Covid and have a bad outcome are very small. The chances that someone will either not catch it, or catch it and it won’t be a big deal for them, are much much much higher. Therefor I’m not “fortunate” to be ok, I would just be extremely unlucky if I wasn’t. No one goes around after a storm saying how lucky they were that they didn’t get struck by lightening. The chances of being struck are very low, therefor you would be incredibly unlucky if you were struck.

So to your point of view there have been 500,000 fatally unlucky people in the US and millions more ranging from miserably unlucky to awfully unlucky with exponentially greater catastrophe world wide... methinks you are being a bit loose with the word unlucky.
Stubbing my toe walking by my bed when the little pinky toe separates from all the other toes so I drop into a shrieking heap is unlucky, getting the earwax flavored Jelly Belly like Dumbledore is unlucky. Getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 is terrible and using the word unlucky is absurd in the face of so much death and damage.

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

Someone did say that, from the CDC: https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-director-data-vaccinated-people-do-not-carry-covid-19-2021-3

You didn’t bother to read the article. Again. It clearly says 90%. Just a piece of advice - read beyond the click bait headlines.

 

[DisneyOma]

You didn’t bother to read the article. Again. It clearly says 90%. Just a piece of advice - read beyond the click bait headlines.

I did - I found it to be so crazy - there's doom, the vaccine is 100% effective, and more, so contradictory that it's scary. The first 3 bullet points are:

• CDC director Rochelle Walensky said data suggests fully vaccinated people don't carry COVID-19.
• On Monday, the CDC released a study finding mRNA vaccines 90% effective at preventing infection.
• Walensky also elaborated on the optimism and "impending doom," she is feeling around the pandemic.

How can it all be true? Suggesting that kind of information, and then reading further down that it's almost true, and then the second bullet info, and finally the doom. That's what I was trying to point out - sorry for the confusion.

 

[RamblingMad]

Some variant percentages by state. No idea why MI is missing from this list.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/variant-proportions.html

 

[RamblingMad]

And here is the effectiveness data. I clipped some bits. The follow article is linked below.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_x
"Estimated adjusted vaccine effectiveness of full immunization was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 68%–97%); vaccine effectiveness of partial immunization was 80% (95% CI = 59%–90%) (Table 2). In sensitivity analyses, inclusion of other covariates (sex, age, ethnicity, and occupation) were entered individually in the vaccine effectiveness model; the change in vaccine effectiveness point estimates were <3%."

. . .

The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations. First, vaccine effectiveness point estimates should be interpreted with caution given the moderately wide CIs attributable in part to the limited number of postimmunization PCR-confirmed infections observed. Second, this also precluded making product-specific vaccine effectiveness estimates and limited the ability to adjust for potential confounders; however, effects were largely unchanged when study site was included in an adjusted vaccine effectiveness model and when adjusted for sex, age, ethnicity, and occupation separately in sensitivity analyses. Finally, self-collection of specimens and delays in shipments could reduce sensitivity of virus detection by PCR (10); if this disproportionately affected those who received the vaccine (e.g., because of possible vaccine attenuation of virus shedding), vaccine effectiveness would be overestimated.