crfriend wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:37 pm
B&B had some very good observations about masks -- very few people know how to wear them properly, or what to do with them when they're no longer serviceable. They also don't work if you've got a beard because there's no way to get a good seal. Too, unless you're after droplet-capture, cloth masks do precisely nothing. The SARS-CoV-2 virus is about 120 billionths of a metre in size; the virus would fly though a cloth "mask" as easily as a hang-glider can pass through the Grand Canyon. For droplet-capture, they might be of some efficacy, but limited. As a viral filter they're worse than useless because they'll encourage risky behaviour. Save the bandana for robbing stage-coaches.
There are some theories going around - based on prior research and experiential (anecdotal) evidence - that the initial viral exposure can contribute greatly to how a person reacts to a virus. Small amounts might not cause as great a sickness, and may prime your body to start producing antibodies. A cloth mask - while not perfect - may reduce the initial exposure and cause a lighter set of symptoms. Additionally, there are studies showing that a cloth mask does filter out particles, just not as good as the commercial options. Even with commercial options there are specific ways you need to handle one... that the general public will fail to do properly. A bandana is a joke, and would do little to reduce exposure.
I have the same fears as you do as far as reporting and fear mongering that is going on. I've read countless articles by CNN, Fox, NPR, NYT, etc... and their headlines are always disconnected with the content. The headlines are written to stoke fear and attention - but when you start reading the "substance" of the article you realize it isn't as bad as the headline proclaims, or even worse the headline bears no resemblance to the article itself. The ones that bug me the most are when the expert quoted in the article says something that discredit's the headline as it was written. Early on the BBC did a HORRIBLE job of quoting a director from the WHO, thankfully they fixed it but I ended up getting so perturbed I sent a correction into themas they way they wrote it was highly misleading.
Or take the Comfort ship that sailed into the NY harbor - it's mission was never to serve COVID-19 patients, yet when it had only taken on 10 patients, news articles started coming out, complaining it wasn't handling COVID patients, and that it has low admittance numbers. Well... that was the point. They made their guidelines more lax, and accidentally took on patients who turned out to be positive for COVID. I don't know if the two things were related but we need calm rational reporting on these matters.
On the raw numbers - rarely does a news piece compare numbers per capita. And when they do they are selective to fit their narrative to make things as scary as possible.
Finally, no one is looking at what the normal deaths per day on average are for a given area, or analyzing how the models are overestimating the counts. These are critical for a rational, fact-based approach to this crisis.