Covid virus in phoenix (Tempe: mall, tuition, approval)

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Burning Madolf

Sorry but the actual take away for me is that too small a sample size leads to just guessing (along with no ability to confirm who was at a protest, for how many days, what was the total, etc.).

I understand your POV. For instance, if MPLS had a super small amount of people with COVID, by definition, the infection rate would be small. Additionally, if someone was concerned enough to get a test, on average, they would probably be more careful (mask wearer) and on average, probably doing a better job staying farther away from others. If that is true, the data is skewed.

So no, you cannot conclude anything off of this set of data all by itself. But the numbers have not shown up in NYC or around Boston https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/20...onavirus-spike. I can give you other data if you like.

As to "common sense" and transmission. Yea, obviously some infections happened. And per my quote in which you highlighted, Epidemiologists were surprised by how little infections showed up. Hence my personal theory: Big particulates (spit) by chewing, talking, singing, or yelling without a mask is problematic... Especially while being inside. It's merely an educated guess.

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by Sno0909

So, just so we are all clear on your position. You think we should open up concerts and sporting events, as long as they are outside and people wear masks? Any venue that is outdoors is fair game for any type of entertainment? Because according to your steadfast position on the protests, it doesn't matter how many people or how close they are, as long as they are outside and masked.

I don't really have a steadfast position on protesters other than it's been proven to not have had any significant impact, so the continued harping and trying to dodge the facts of such is tired and baseless.

Sporting events, like baseball for example, are a different as you're sitting stagnant in very close quarters with others for hours in only a pseudo-outdoor environment. The situations are not at all the same. Let's quit with the "what ifs" and look at each situation on its own.

[Ponderosa]

So I know of a dozen or so people under 30 now who have contracted COVID since the reopening. None of them were in demonstrations. All of them went to sit down restaurants and clubs, attended house parties, rode together in uber etc.

[ringler24]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

So I know of a dozen or so people under 30 now who have contracted COVID since the reopening. None of them were in demonstrations. All of them went to sit down restaurants and clubs, attended house parties, rode together in uber etc.

Yep I know about 15 or so. None were out protesting. I know people who were at protests and none of them are sick so far. Just my observations.

[Burning Madolf]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

I understand your POV. For instance, if MPLS had a super small amount of people with COVID, by definition, the infection rate would be small. Additionally, if someone was concerned enough to get a test, on average, they would probably be more careful (mask wearer) and on average, probably doing a better job staying farther away from others. If that is true, the data is skewed.

So no, you cannot conclude anything off of this set of data all by itself. But the numbers have not shown up in NYC or around Boston https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/20...onavirus-spike. I can give you other data if you like.

As to "common sense" and transmission. Yea, obviously some infections happened. And per my quote in which you highlighted, Epidemiologists were surprised by how little infections showed up. Hence my personal theory: Big particulates (spit) by chewing, talking, singing, or yelling without a mask is problematic... Especially while being inside. It's merely an educated guess.

No more data please.
Here's my issue:
MN tested 13k and said "hey, no spike."
Boston tests 3k and said "hey, no spike."
I hear you on the transmission, but large crowds are gathering (linking arms now), some screaming without masks (at cops usually) and some are living in squalor at various locals. For anyone to even imply that this behavior is okay compared to other behaviors leads to the idea that rules and suggestions don't apply to everyone. Hence the 'forget this' attitude of so many.

If I zip through a store for 10 minutes without a mask and come within 10 feet of less than 10 people, I'm a problem. But if a bunch of morons want to camp out in a city during a pandemic with new people coming in and out everyday that's not a problem. We can't yell at one group and not the other, masks or no masks. Social distancing was also supposed to be very important.

[Jnvlv247]

Originally Posted by ringler24

Yep I know about 15 or so. None were out protesting. I know people who were at protests and none of them are sick so far. Just my observations.

Yes we all know gathering in large crowds outside makes you immune as long as it's for social justice

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by Jnvlv247

Yes we all know gathering in large crowds outside makes you immune as long as it's for social justice

No one said that other than you.

The "immunity", however, is aided by two major mitigators: masks and being outside. Social justice has zero to do with it. Just facts.

[Jnvlv247]

Originally Posted by DetroitN8V

I don't really have a steadfast position on protesters other than it's been proven to not have had any significant impact, so the continued harping and trying to dodge the facts of such is tired and baseless.

Sporting events, like baseball for example, are a different as you're sitting stagnant in very close quarters with others for hours in only a pseudo-outdoor environment. The situations are not at all the same. Let's quit with the "what ifs" and look at each situation on its own.

Actually there's no real evidence any place is better than another. We see stories of people catching doing one thing and another not getting the disease doing something just as "bad"

It's just all a gamble. You could go to the store JUST once during quaratine and get it. Someone could catch if they delivered mail or a package to you when you are activilely trying to avoid it. It's all not a one size fits all. Certainly putting yourself in a high risk situation is not good but community spread is happening regardless of lockdowns and altering of lifestyles.

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by Jnvlv247

Actually there's no real evidence any place is better than another. We see stories of people catching doing one thing and another not getting the disease doing something just as "bad"

It's just all a gamble. You could go to the store JUST once during quaratine and get it. Someone could catch if they delivered mail or a package to you when you are activilely trying to avoid it. It's all not a one size fits all. Certainly putting yourself in a high risk situation is not good but community spread is happening regardless of lockdowns and altering of lifestyles.

There is plenty of evidence supporting various risk mitigation efforts including masks and socially distancing. To suggest the contrary is untrue.

Of course you could get it by going to the store just once and following guidelines. This thing is highly contagious. What seems to be missed though, is that you are far more likely to get it by doing riskier activities. It's a gamble whose odds can be dramatically shifted by behavior. When gambling and given the chance to control the odds in one's favor, smart people do so.

[Zippyman]

Originally Posted by Jnvlv247

Actually there's no real evidence any place is better than another. We see stories of people catching doing one thing and another not getting the disease doing something just as "bad"

It's just all a gamble. You could go to the store JUST once during quaratine and get it. Someone could catch if they delivered mail or a package to you when you are activilely trying to avoid it. It's all not a one size fits all. Certainly putting yourself in a high risk situation is not good but community spread is happening regardless of lockdowns and altering of lifestyles.

That’s not it though - you can’t just pretend there’s an invisible lottery going on as to who gets it - there is evidence that is extremely convincing regarding things like the choir group that had the huge outbreak, people in restaurants getting it passed by a/c units and healthcare workers like paramedics getting a schnozfull of virus from multiple really sick patients and dying in their 20’s and 30’s.

Science is still science - something like a choir group passing it around because they’re simultaneously emptying their lungs and breathing deeply makes a lot of sense. Recirculating air-conditioning (often done in commercial settings via “chillers” which increase humidity) as a mode of transmission makes sense.

Cheap paper or cloth masks are surprisingly effective - and it can’t be the intake-filtering they do, because we know they don’t actually filter jack when you’re breathing in. So we’re learning that it’s more important to transmission that the bulk of your neighbor’s cough being contained is more important that filtering every molecule of air that you breathe. That’s a little surprising, but it still makes sense.

There are certainly a few things that don’t make sense - like protesting not being that big of a transmitter, and things like gas stations seemingly not being huge disease vectors.. everyone touches the “87” button, everyone touches the pump handle, 96% of the customers touch the handle on the cooler where the Mountain Dew is..

That doesn’t make every action into a “gamble”.. Just because we haven’t figured everything out a few months into this doesn’t give anyone an excuse to just throw their hands up and pretend “we don’t know anything” .

Feel free to lick the “87” button at QT next time you’re there, but continue to wear a mask if you’re indoors in a public setting.