Community Chat

[GrailSeeker]

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@busymom22 wrote:

I never trusted WHO or even the CDC and their "experts" as there are too many political ramifications and connections.  Their findings and advice have flip-flopped so much that it just confuses the American public even more.

It really feels like there is an agenda to keep people in a state of perpetual fear.  I know some who are so scared that they hang on every word of WHO or CDC.  Use precautions, stay home if you are at risk, but we have to open things up as much as possible.

---

@busymom22, I'm not hanging my hat on this latest from WHO, but this particular news contradicts your belief that all they want to do is ramp up fear.

---

I took it that it is now convenient to dial back the fear that they previously ramped up. 

[GrailSeeker]

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@Lipstickdiva wrote:

---

@Stray wrote:
That has not been the experience in N Jersey. We lead in Covid-19 testing nationally. Our statistics do not support the WHO “theory”. My own friends were asymptomatic or very mild that passed in a day. I’ve lost 4 friends who did not exhibit symptoms until they were in the final stages. There is a pre clinical or prodromal period in most communicable diseases where they are contagious. How would you determine those factors? They in fact are silent carriers. The answer social distancing and masks in the presence of an out of control outbreak with no therapy, no cure, no vaccine and a high death toll. A new virus highly virulent and highly contagious that targets high risk citizens. They had it right. It doesn’t matter about the “rarity”. They are playing games with words. Children were supposed to be almost immune from the disease but here in NJ, we are seeing PIMS. Most parents would rush their kids to a pediatrician if sick but they don’t display severe symptoms at first or the same as adults but they do spread the disease. We’ve had two young teachers die in our town under 30 from seemingly well children. I find the WHO statement dangerous and no agency tracks disease globally better than the CDC. Countries that contained the virus early and quicker were even more austere with measures. Didn’t the WHO say masks weren’t necessary but retracted that statement a couple of weeks ago and told us to wear masks? It’s so simple to do and I don’t really see it to be an imposition to possibly save my life and that of others

---

@Stray, I'm not sure about WHO but the CDC initially said masks shouldn't be worn and then came out and said they were necessary to protect others so they should be worn. 

---

@Lipstickdivaif memory still serves me, I believe that a good deal of the rational behind their not supporting masks was that they feared for a shortage among health workers.

BTY, not everyone is on board about the efficacy of the masks we non-health people are wearing. I have read an excellent piece by one epidemologist who debunks the now well-advertised use of mask.

I wear one here when I go into a market because otherwise they won't let me in. But I don't wear one when exercise walking, so I am a scofflaw. I am very careful about distance, though.

---

I wonder particularly about the little kids, if they go back to school this fall.

It is one thing to wear a mask for the half hour it takes to get groceries.  Quite another to be confined to a mask all day in school, breathing in your own carbon dioxide, trying to pay attention and do school work.  Can't see that being efficacious, practical, or healthy. 

[suzyQ3]

---

@GrailSeeker wrote:

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@Lipstickdiva wrote:

---

@Stray wrote:
That has not been the experience in N Jersey. We lead in Covid-19 testing nationally. Our statistics do not support the WHO “theory”. My own friends were asymptomatic or very mild that passed in a day. I’ve lost 4 friends who did not exhibit symptoms until they were in the final stages. There is a pre clinical or prodromal period in most communicable diseases where they are contagious. How would you determine those factors? They in fact are silent carriers. The answer social distancing and masks in the presence of an out of control outbreak with no therapy, no cure, no vaccine and a high death toll. A new virus highly virulent and highly contagious that targets high risk citizens. They had it right. It doesn’t matter about the “rarity”. They are playing games with words. Children were supposed to be almost immune from the disease but here in NJ, we are seeing PIMS. Most parents would rush their kids to a pediatrician if sick but they don’t display severe symptoms at first or the same as adults but they do spread the disease. We’ve had two young teachers die in our town under 30 from seemingly well children. I find the WHO statement dangerous and no agency tracks disease globally better than the CDC. Countries that contained the virus early and quicker were even more austere with measures. Didn’t the WHO say masks weren’t necessary but retracted that statement a couple of weeks ago and told us to wear masks? It’s so simple to do and I don’t really see it to be an imposition to possibly save my life and that of others

---

@Stray, I'm not sure about WHO but the CDC initially said masks shouldn't be worn and then came out and said they were necessary to protect others so they should be worn. 

---

@Lipstickdivaif memory still serves me, I believe that a good deal of the rational behind their not supporting masks was that they feared for a shortage among health workers.

BTY, not everyone is on board about the efficacy of the masks we non-health people are wearing. I have read an excellent piece by one epidemologist who debunks the now well-advertised use of mask.

I wear one here when I go into a market because otherwise they won't let me in. But I don't wear one when exercise walking, so I am a scofflaw. I am very careful about distance, though.

---

I wonder particularly about the little kids, if they go back to school this fall.

It is one thing to wear a mask for the half hour it takes to get groceries.  Quite another to be confined to a mask all day in school, breathing in your own carbon dioxide, trying to pay attention and do school work.  Can't see that being efficacious, practical, or healthy. 

---

@GrailSeeker, it is definitely a concern. I also think that as we approach hot weather (I'm sitting in it right now), we're going to see less compliance. I would think shields would less onerous, but I know they are not practical for general use.

[Porcelain]

Sounds like somewhat good news. I'm guardedly pleased about it.

So now the antiscience contingent believes the medical experts. Hope that will continue even when they tell you things you don't want to hear as well. Gotta take the good with the bad if you don't want to fool yourself.

[reiki604]

---

@bikerbabe wrote:
I haven’t read every post here but just a couple of thoughts that maybe we should keep in mind:

The media jumps on anything that anyone says regarding COVID and it spreads like wildfire.

Our understanding of most major infectious diseases is based on massive data bases of information collected over decades, even centuries. COVID is only months old! Researchers are releasing data at a record pace in order to help each other. Studies that normally would take years are being done in a matter of a few months. While there will always be a few unscrupulous actors in the mix, the majority of the medical community are just trying to help. It does not surprise me at all that there is conflicting data or advice. In fact, I would say it’s expected for something so new.

As an aside, I don’t want to call out any names but, I’ve seen multiple posts about a cheap miracle cure for Covid. I wish someone would tell my patients because that has not been my experience. Nor has it been the experience of the physicians that I’ve spoken to at my hospital. I suspect the treatment will eventually settle on a multi-drug regimen.

---

that is because you are talking from an educated and critical thinking point of view rather than wishful thinking and believing only what fits their comfort zone and/or their agenda.

[shoesnbags]

---

@GrailSeeker wrote:

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@Lipstickdiva wrote:

---

@Stray wrote:
That has not been the experience in N Jersey. We lead in Covid-19 testing nationally. Our statistics do not support the WHO “theory”. My own friends were asymptomatic or very mild that passed in a day. I’ve lost 4 friends who did not exhibit symptoms until they were in the final stages. There is a pre clinical or prodromal period in most communicable diseases where they are contagious. How would you determine those factors? They in fact are silent carriers. The answer social distancing and masks in the presence of an out of control outbreak with no therapy, no cure, no vaccine and a high death toll. A new virus highly virulent and highly contagious that targets high risk citizens. They had it right. It doesn’t matter about the “rarity”. They are playing games with words. Children were supposed to be almost immune from the disease but here in NJ, we are seeing PIMS. Most parents would rush their kids to a pediatrician if sick but they don’t display severe symptoms at first or the same as adults but they do spread the disease. We’ve had two young teachers die in our town under 30 from seemingly well children. I find the WHO statement dangerous and no agency tracks disease globally better than the CDC. Countries that contained the virus early and quicker were even more austere with measures. Didn’t the WHO say masks weren’t necessary but retracted that statement a couple of weeks ago and told us to wear masks? It’s so simple to do and I don’t really see it to be an imposition to possibly save my life and that of others

---

@Stray, I'm not sure about WHO but the CDC initially said masks shouldn't be worn and then came out and said they were necessary to protect others so they should be worn. 

---

@Lipstickdivaif memory still serves me, I believe that a good deal of the rational behind their not supporting masks was that they feared for a shortage among health workers.

BTY, not everyone is on board about the efficacy of the masks we non-health people are wearing. I have read an excellent piece by one epidemologist who debunks the now well-advertised use of mask.

I wear one here when I go into a market because otherwise they won't let me in. But I don't wear one when exercise walking, so I am a scofflaw. I am very careful about distance, though.

---

I wonder particularly about the little kids, if they go back to school this fall.

It is one thing to wear a mask for the half hour it takes to get groceries.  Quite another to be confined to a mask all day in school, breathing in your own carbon dioxide, trying to pay attention and do school work.  Can't see that being efficacious, practical, or healthy. 

---

@GrailSeeker 

From what I've read, the carbon dioxide issue refers to N95 masks worn by healthcare workers. They seal tightly to the face and are worn for long shifts, 8 hours or more.  The typical cloth or disposable masks worn by the rest of us are quite permeable (and looser), allowing CO2 to flow out.  

[reiki604]

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@busymom22 wrote:

I never trusted WHO or even the CDC and their "experts" as there are too many political ramifications and connections.  Their findings and advice have flip-flopped so much that it just confuses the American public even more.

It really feels like there is an agenda to keep people in a state of perpetual fear.  I know some who are so scared that they hang on every word of WHO or CDC.  Use precautions, stay home if you are at risk, but we have to open things up as much as possible.

---

@busymom22, I'm not hanging my hat on this latest from WHO, but this particular news contradicts your belief that all they want to do is ramp up fear.

---

If you read the scientist's walkback this morning, she works for WHO but never claimed it was WHO's position. People will believe what they want to. Symptomatic for Covid may just be a runny nose or a little fatique that the patient doesn't even register as a symptom. To them, they are asymptomatic but in reality they are not.

[GrailSeeker]

---

@reiki604 wrote:

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@busymom22 wrote:

I never trusted WHO or even the CDC and their "experts" as there are too many political ramifications and connections.  Their findings and advice have flip-flopped so much that it just confuses the American public even more.

It really feels like there is an agenda to keep people in a state of perpetual fear.  I know some who are so scared that they hang on every word of WHO or CDC.  Use precautions, stay home if you are at risk, but we have to open things up as much as possible.

---

@busymom22, I'm not hanging my hat on this latest from WHO, but this particular news contradicts your belief that all they want to do is ramp up fear.

---

If you read the scientist's walkback this morning, she works for WHO but never claimed it was WHO's position. People will believe what they want to. Symptomatic for Covid may just be a runny nose or a little fatique that the patient doesn't even register as a symptom. To them, they are asymptomatic but in reality they are not.

---

Also very confusing because these were not listed as symptoms of Covid-19 in the beginning.

That problematic youngest son of mine came home one day from work sneezing his head off and producing a lot of phlem.  This was back in early March when the talk about coronavirus was just being taken seriously, but the state had not been shut down yet.

I was having a hard time making myself clear to him about what he needed to do regarding infectious disease control.  But I was not real concerned, because mild cold symptoms were not what was being described as Covid-19.

He does tend to allergic reactions to pollin, dust, and smoke, but he said no, this was definitely a cold.

At any rate, I was somewhat concerned, because he had been healthy all winter long prior to this, but then I didn't catch it from him, either.   Now, knowing this about "very mild symptoms" I should have been more concerned, because it very well could have been Covid-19.. 

[QueenDanceALot]

---

@GrailSeeker wrote:

---

@Pook wrote:

Also, sounds like some just want to interpret/hear what justifies not socila dista cing or wearing masks and going back to  crowds, etc, !!  Someone can be contageous 4-5 days before showing symptoms so precautions are still necessary at this point.

---

But this is what the WHO is disagreeing about.  They are saying that if no symptoms are shown, a person is not contagious; so no, they are not contagious for 4 to 5 days beforehand. 

---

No, they're not saying that.  You are contagious when you are PREsymptomatic, they are not arguing that.  It is still thought that perhaps 40% of cases are spread during the presymptomatic stage of a few to several days before symptoms show.

The WHO has already come out to walk back/clarify what their spokesperson said.

People who never show symptoms and are just carriers are one thing.  People who pass the virus on before they show symptoms are another.

[GrailSeeker]

---

@shoesnbags wrote:

---

@GrailSeeker wrote:

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@Lipstickdiva wrote:

---

@Stray wrote:
That has not been the experience in N Jersey. We lead in Covid-19 testing nationally. Our statistics do not support the WHO “theory”. My own friends were asymptomatic or very mild that passed in a day. I’ve lost 4 friends who did not exhibit symptoms until they were in the final stages. There is a pre clinical or prodromal period in most communicable diseases where they are contagious. How would you determine those factors? They in fact are silent carriers. The answer social distancing and masks in the presence of an out of control outbreak with no therapy, no cure, no vaccine and a high death toll. A new virus highly virulent and highly contagious that targets high risk citizens. They had it right. It doesn’t matter about the “rarity”. They are playing games with words. Children were supposed to be almost immune from the disease but here in NJ, we are seeing PIMS. Most parents would rush their kids to a pediatrician if sick but they don’t display severe symptoms at first or the same as adults but they do spread the disease. We’ve had two young teachers die in our town under 30 from seemingly well children. I find the WHO statement dangerous and no agency tracks disease globally better than the CDC. Countries that contained the virus early and quicker were even more austere with measures. Didn’t the WHO say masks weren’t necessary but retracted that statement a couple of weeks ago and told us to wear masks? It’s so simple to do and I don’t really see it to be an imposition to possibly save my life and that of others

---

@Stray, I'm not sure about WHO but the CDC initially said masks shouldn't be worn and then came out and said they were necessary to protect others so they should be worn. 

---

@Lipstickdivaif memory still serves me, I believe that a good deal of the rational behind their not supporting masks was that they feared for a shortage among health workers.

BTY, not everyone is on board about the efficacy of the masks we non-health people are wearing. I have read an excellent piece by one epidemologist who debunks the now well-advertised use of mask.

I wear one here when I go into a market because otherwise they won't let me in. But I don't wear one when exercise walking, so I am a scofflaw. I am very careful about distance, though.

---

I wonder particularly about the little kids, if they go back to school this fall.

It is one thing to wear a mask for the half hour it takes to get groceries.  Quite another to be confined to a mask all day in school, breathing in your own carbon dioxide, trying to pay attention and do school work.  Can't see that being efficacious, practical, or healthy. 

---

@GrailSeeker 

From what I've read, the carbon dioxide issue refers to N95 masks worn by healthcare workers. They seal tightly to the face and are worn for long shifts, 8 hours or more.  The typical cloth or disposable masks worn by the rest of us are quite permeable (and looser), allowing CO2 to flow out.  

---

And also, presumably, the virus particles.