The visitor center is going to be open and we expect that visitors will follow guidelines for social distancing. But mission essential personnel will be protected – @JimBridnestine
Oddly @Astro_CabanaBob happily mentions this photo of a bridge with crowds noting that it "looked like the last space shuttle launch." Of course absolutely everyone is violating social distancing and @CDC guidelines. But who cares. #LaunchAmerica Picture: Tim Shortt/Florida Today pic.twitter.com/ftgUiExl5z
On the other hand POTUS is probably tested daily for coronavirus infection. The masks are supposed to keep you from infecting others so if your confirmed not to have it the mask doesn’t help anyone.
No the masks have value both ways. Just because he gets a test at 9:00 am that says he is negative does not mean he can’t be positive by 3:00 pm. These tests are also somewhat unreliable. The responsible thing to do = the thing that CDC asks people to do – is wear masks.
I will probably regret posting this, but here is the World Health Organization guidance on Masks from their website. So unless its a N95 mask it isn’t going to help to wear one because, unlike bacteria, a virus is too small to be stopped by a non-N95 mask. Masks like those folks are wearing are only good for stopping the spray from coughing and sneezing. But if you are coughing and sneezing the responsible thing is to stay home.
Yes, but notice just how carefully it is worded? And on making masks at home?
BTW Here is an article from the New England Journal of Medicine about the use of masks. The danger of course is that folks may feel safer by wearing a mask and take greater risks not realizing that none N95 masks actually provide very little safety.
Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H., Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H., Julia Sinclair, M.B.A., Madelyn Pearson, D.N.P., R.N., and Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.
We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”
and
“One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask, particularly in light of the worldwide mask shortage, but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis. Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19”
….which discusses only “passing” interactions in non-healthcare settings. Stuck on a causeway or even a semi-crowded VIP viewing area (or forced to take refuse in a moderate-size museum with a couple of hundred of your closest friends is probably not included in that.
Recent incidents in (quite recently) reopened churches, in which a single, asymptomatic, unmasked individual may have infected twenty to forty others, are instructive. People separated by enough distance, out of doors, may be able to dispense with masks, but you can’t predict how close others will come to you, the infected but asymptomatic individual who’s shedding virus.
Yes, the 6ft guidelines are based on ancient research and the distance should be larger. The New England Journal of Medicine article also notes the longer you are in proximity the greater the odds of catching it, inside or outside. It also explains why eastern cities heavily dependent on mass transit got hit so hard so fast.
Probably one reason why going to the beaches and open areas that usually have good breezes is better. Brevard county where the cape is at has a very low positive test rate.
As does Los Angeles and Las Vegas where most commutes are by automobile have lower rates. Virus spread best in crowds, crowds in concentrated downtown areas as are found in cities built on 19th Century transportation technology, “crowds” in small 18th Century based villages where folks live crowded together and crowds on causeways watching the Dragon2 launch. The one good thing about Wednesday is that the storms (wind and rain) probably helped sanitize the air and slowed transmission.
That’s a bit of a leap from what’s in the article, isn’t it? If you don’t live in an eastern US city or have not spent much time in one lately, most of the public transportation vehicles (not underground stations, however) have excellent ventilation, and even functioning air conditioning. The most frequent infections appear to have been passenger-to-bus driver transmissions, at least before the drivers got surrounded by plexiglass or plastic.
The infections in the northeast, as far as I can tell, came primarily from (1) the influx of visitors from Europe or locals from trips to Europe, where the more virulent strain of the virus appears to have developed, and (2) as in many places across the country, a visit by an infected person to an old-age care facility with poor routine procedures to prevent virus transmission (and you wonder why the number of deaths from the flu spikes among older people every winter….). From those two sources, of course, it spread to many more people, and so on.
Just avoid indoor choir practice until further notice.
Yes, the type C which emerged after it left China does seem to be better adapted for human to human transmission. All the “good” ventilation on mass transit does is make it easier for the virus to circulate through the crowds on subway cars, rail cars, buses, station platforms not to mention taxis by setting up air currents to move it around. Incidentally, engineers in subways and on rail commuter trains were isolated before it arrived so their low infection rate says nothing about what was going on with the passengers riding in the cars.
And just because a mass transit vehicle looks clean and the air seems cool and fresh doesn’t mean it isn’t carrying the virus. Viruses don’t care how things appear, they just need air currents to move them from one host to another, the faster the better. Which is why viruses don’t care that mass transit is politically correct, to a virus the crowd of passengers is simply the ideal environment to spread from one individual to another. It is a factor that should be considered in the design of future mass transit systems but probably won’t be if the past is any guide. And than there are the crowded skyscrapers with crowded elevators…
In fairness, Dr. M., we are witnessing the normal progress of a scientific investigation; this one is open to the public, and it is progressing at lightening speed, exposing a naturally, and deliberately, messy process.
Yes, we started fighting this virus like it was SARS and found out it had a lot of different tricks up its sleeves, including spreading without showing symptoms, which is likely why early actions against it were so ineffective. Also, if the Diamond Princess and U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt are examples, it seems to find only about 20% of the population as being a suitable host. But it will take years to find out why that appears to be the case with it. Also unknown is how long immunity lasts after you have it (is it forever or only for a few months) and why.
There is one advantage to wearing a mask which is more sociological than medical. What if someone has an ordinary cold or allergies? That’s not a reason make people to stay at home. But imagine what the people around such a person would think, if he sneezes and isn’t wearing a mask? In a way, this is like many airport security measures. They aren’t all that effective. But they keep many people from getting overly nervous about a risk, and that makes it easier for vaguely normal life to continue.
In my mind, that is not exactly the point. A leader should lead by example. Also there is new info coming out daily about the effectiveness of masks, even rudimentary cloth non-medical masks. It seems they are beneficial in stopping the transfer of (some) virus both ways, ie for both parties, the one wearing the mask and the ones he or she is interacting with. It is not a coincidence that Asian countries that have a culture of wearing masks as a matter of course have faired way better than western countries where this is not normal.
And right there is a picture of POTUS and FLOTUS not wearing masks. Lack of servant leadership right there.
On the other hand POTUS is probably tested daily for coronavirus infection. The masks are supposed to keep you from infecting others so if your confirmed not to have it the mask doesn’t help anyone.
No the masks have value both ways. Just because he gets a test at 9:00 am that says he is negative does not mean he can’t be positive by 3:00 pm. These tests are also somewhat unreliable. The responsible thing to do = the thing that CDC asks people to do – is wear masks.
I will probably regret posting this, but here is the World Health Organization guidance on Masks from their website. So unless its a N95 mask it isn’t going to help to wear one because, unlike bacteria, a virus is too small to be stopped by a non-N95 mask. Masks like those folks are wearing are only good for stopping the spray from coughing and sneezing. But if you are coughing and sneezing the responsible thing is to stay home.
https://www.who.int/images/…
The CDC guidelines are different. https://www.cdc.gov/coronav…
Yes, but notice just how carefully it is worded? And on making masks at home?
BTW Here is an article from the New England Journal of Medicine about the use of masks. The danger of course is that folks may feel safer by wearing a mask and take greater risks not realizing that none N95 masks actually provide very little safety.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/fu…
Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era
Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H., Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H., Julia Sinclair, M.B.A., Madelyn Pearson, D.N.P., R.N., and Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.
We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”
and
“One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask, particularly in light of the worldwide mask shortage, but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis. Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19”
….which discusses only “passing” interactions in non-healthcare settings. Stuck on a causeway or even a semi-crowded VIP viewing area (or forced to take refuse in a moderate-size museum with a couple of hundred of your closest friends is probably not included in that.
Recent incidents in (quite recently) reopened churches, in which a single, asymptomatic, unmasked individual may have infected twenty to forty others, are instructive. People separated by enough distance, out of doors, may be able to dispense with masks, but you can’t predict how close others will come to you, the infected but asymptomatic individual who’s shedding virus.
And then, of course, people may sneeze: https://www.oregonlive.com/…
Yes, the 6ft guidelines are based on ancient research and the distance should be larger. The New England Journal of Medicine article also notes the longer you are in proximity the greater the odds of catching it, inside or outside. It also explains why eastern cities heavily dependent on mass transit got hit so hard so fast.
Probably one reason why going to the beaches and open areas that usually have good breezes is better. Brevard county where the cape is at has a very low positive test rate.
As does Los Angeles and Las Vegas where most commutes are by automobile have lower rates. Virus spread best in crowds, crowds in concentrated downtown areas as are found in cities built on 19th Century transportation technology, “crowds” in small 18th Century based villages where folks live crowded together and crowds on causeways watching the Dragon2 launch. The one good thing about Wednesday is that the storms (wind and rain) probably helped sanitize the air and slowed transmission.
Crowds on roads and causeways close to the coast are generally as breezy as beaches so that comparison may not be valid.
That’s a bit of a leap from what’s in the article, isn’t it? If you don’t live in an eastern US city or have not spent much time in one lately, most of the public transportation vehicles (not underground stations, however) have excellent ventilation, and even functioning air conditioning. The most frequent infections appear to have been passenger-to-bus driver transmissions, at least before the drivers got surrounded by plexiglass or plastic.
The infections in the northeast, as far as I can tell, came primarily from (1) the influx of visitors from Europe or locals from trips to Europe, where the more virulent strain of the virus appears to have developed, and (2) as in many places across the country, a visit by an infected person to an old-age care facility with poor routine procedures to prevent virus transmission (and you wonder why the number of deaths from the flu spikes among older people every winter….). From those two sources, of course, it spread to many more people, and so on.
Just avoid indoor choir practice until further notice.
Yes, the type C which emerged after it left China does seem to be better adapted for human to human transmission. All the “good” ventilation on mass transit does is make it easier for the virus to circulate through the crowds on subway cars, rail cars, buses, station platforms not to mention taxis by setting up air currents to move it around. Incidentally, engineers in subways and on rail commuter trains were isolated before it arrived so their low infection rate says nothing about what was going on with the passengers riding in the cars.
And just because a mass transit vehicle looks clean and the air seems cool and fresh doesn’t mean it isn’t carrying the virus. Viruses don’t care how things appear, they just need air currents to move them from one host to another, the faster the better. Which is why viruses don’t care that mass transit is politically correct, to a virus the crowd of passengers is simply the ideal environment to spread from one individual to another. It is a factor that should be considered in the design of future mass transit systems but probably won’t be if the past is any guide. And than there are the crowded skyscrapers with crowded elevators…
In fairness, Dr. M., we are witnessing the normal progress of a scientific investigation; this one is open to the public, and it is progressing at lightening speed, exposing a naturally, and deliberately, messy process.
Yes, we started fighting this virus like it was SARS and found out it had a lot of different tricks up its sleeves, including spreading without showing symptoms, which is likely why early actions against it were so ineffective. Also, if the Diamond Princess and U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt are examples, it seems to find only about 20% of the population as being a suitable host. But it will take years to find out why that appears to be the case with it. Also unknown is how long immunity lasts after you have it (is it forever or only for a few months) and why.
There is one advantage to wearing a mask which is more sociological than medical. What if someone has an ordinary cold or allergies? That’s not a reason make people to stay at home. But imagine what the people around such a person would think, if he sneezes and isn’t wearing a mask? In a way, this is like many airport security measures. They aren’t all that effective. But they keep many people from getting overly nervous about a risk, and that makes it easier for vaguely normal life to continue.
In my mind, that is not exactly the point. A leader should lead by example. Also there is new info coming out daily about the effectiveness of masks, even rudimentary cloth non-medical masks. It seems they are beneficial in stopping the transfer of (some) virus both ways, ie for both parties, the one wearing the mask and the ones he or she is interacting with. It is not a coincidence that Asian countries that have a culture of wearing masks as a matter of course have faired way better than western countries where this is not normal.