Best Posts in Thread: Face Shields

I do not have the “expertise” on this subject that my fellow cell mates apparently have but after all the back and forth posts I am left wondering if the right answer is, “there is no right answer”!

 

Positions on wearing PPE or any form of control, to prevent a viral disease which has already spread worldwide (proof for those who ask 'does it actually spread'), have joined religion, sport, politics, tastes in art, etc, where people have taken a stance and won't budge. There are some right answers and some wrong ones - these will be debated for years to come (long after most of the governments who made the decisions have gone) - but you can bet that scientist will continue to argue with scientist, country with country, people with people (including Nomads with Apes).

But on a personal level, there is 'one right answer'- what the individual believes. I can accept the idea of individual decisions, for example, in religion, sport, tastes in art as generally they have no effect on me personally - I can even accept it in politics as we (usually) end up having a government most people wanted, even if I dislike it, but in the case of a contagious pathogen I have the right to expect the best decisions to be made for the benefit of the majority.

 

As long as "we" does not include me, then I don't care a toss.

 

Valid reasons .. I would only add that if used properly then Seniors should be released from lockdown to actively participate in the revival of the economy as we do spend a significant amount ...

 

I think in the Dumaguete area, which this Forum mostly covers, no one has currently any need to feel scared. I think many are cautious (which obviously I agree with) but with zero local transmission, there is currently more chance of being hit by a driver with a new car ( ) than of dying from Covid-19.

The people who defend using PPE as a means to protect themselves (as it does - contrary to other viewpoints here), are also advocating its use to stop infecting others. So why would they write all of this if they live in an almost zero-risk area (except for that car driver!)? I believe it is because they care about people and are expressing broad views relating to Dumaguete, The Philippines and the World. Obviously, there IS a risk that the virus could appear in their locality and infect them BEFORE the presence of the virus is known, so they are just reacting to 'what if' - as people do in most situations ('What if' I lose my job - should I have some emergency savings? 'What if' there are burglars about - should I add security to my home?). There is nothing wrong with caring about other people and caring about oneself - both (especially in a societal species) are what evolution had led to.

 

I get the distinct feeling that I/we are being led on .... so I for one will not continue to "beat a dead horse"

 

As an epidemiologist, your work would be involved with the spread of a disease - including how the virus spreads and what public health measures can be used to reduce or stop that. But often you challenge anyone here trying to reduce the spread and you give examples of people NOT doing anything (or doing it badly) as evidence that the whole thing is pointless.

An epidemiologist should be backing control methods and decrying the people not observing them - NOT criticising the methods being put in place. It is the people who criticise control methods or fail to obey them who are the ones an epidemiologist should be worrying about.

 

Well, first of all, a mask is primarily meant to keep the wearer from spreading the virus to others in tiny droplets and aerosols.
From a recent article in The Lancet: ( https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30323-4/fulltext )
"Surgical masks might offer some respiratory protection from inhalation of infectious aerosols, but not as much as respirators.
However, surgical masks worn by patients reduce exposures to infectious aerosols to health-care workers and other individuals."
So yes masks are pretty effective, but mostly if worn by infected people.
Second, and yes I'm always up for some fun, but that comparison in the picture is misleading, in the sense that the main transmission mode for this virus
is through such tiny droplets and aerosols. So yes, the virus itself is a lot smaller than the holes in a woven mask, but that's beside the point, because those tiny droplets and aerosols that the virus travels in are much much bigger. Big enough to get caught in a mask.

 

You are aware that the virus attaches itself to droplets emitted by sneezing and coughing... the mask will and does impair the droplets from becoming airborne. This was stated over and over by virologists and epidemiologists all over the world.... this practice will continues to save lives regardless of these cartoons but nonetheless should be challenged wherever they appear.. I wish you good health