The Coronavirus Thread

[Scot Dutchy]

No one lives in the desert in Australia

But even the urban concentrations are hundreds of kilometres apart. Nothing compared to Europe.

[Brian Peacock]

But the people in those urban centres live and work just as cheek-to-jowl as any other developed town or city. Australia might be a big, empty place relatively speaking, but it's not like Australian houses, restaurant tables, desks, or seats on the bus are further apart than anywhere else.

[BarnettNewman]

It never will Jim you just dont have the numbers. At 3 inhabitants per sqkm it should never be a problem.

Canada is +/-two, but do go on...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[pErvinalia]

It never will Jim you just dont have the numbers. At 3 inhabitants per sqkm it should never be a problem.

It's in Melbourne, not the outback.

[Hermit]

It never will Jim you just dont have the numbers. At 3 inhabitants per sqkm it should never be a problem.

To be sure, population density is a factor in the prevalence of the pandemic, but it is not the only one. If it were, the following data would be impossible.

Country    Population/km²   Cases/million
Japan              333                    3,248
UK                   280                  58,712
USA                   34                  84,294

[Brian Peacock]

We've done this one already...

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 4#p1888624
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 2#p1888542

[Tero]

Scotty is right? Leave the mask off (well, he would never wear one indoors even) when stepping out:

No documented cases
The answer to the first question, according to many experts, is: They seem to do little good. Prohibiting outdoor activity is unlikely to reduce the spread of the virus, nor is urging people always to wear a mask outdoors.

Worldwide, scientists have not documented any instances of outdoor transmission unless people were in close conversation, Dr. Muge Cevik, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, told me. “The small number of cases where outdoor transmission might have occurred,” she wrote on Twitter, “were associated with close interactions, particularly extended duration, or settings where people mixed indoors alongside an outdoor setting.” The new variants of the virus are more contagious, but there is no evidence to suggest they will change this pattern.

As my colleague Tara Parker-Pope puts it, “Avoid breathing the air that other people exhale.”

A student walking across campus — let alone a masked student — presents little risk to another student who remains at least six feet away. The same goes for joggers in your neighborhood.

The story is similar for deep cleaning. “Scientists increasingly say that there is little to no evidence that contaminated surfaces can spread the virus,” my colleagues Mike Ives and Apoorva Mandavilli have written. The one surface that is important to wash, frequently and vigorously, is the human hand.

Which brings us to the second question — whether there is any downside to absolutism. Covid-19 is a horrible disease. And the notion that a jogger somewhere might infect somebody she passes, even from more than six feet away, is scientifically plausible.

So why not take every possible precaution at all times?

Unintended consequences
The short answer is: because we are human.

Taking every possible precaution is unrealistic, just as telling all gay men and teenagers to abstain from sex was unrealistic. Human beings are social creatures who crave connection and pleasure and who cannot minimize danger at all times.

Despite the risks, we eat carbs, drink wine, go sledding and even ride in automobiles. We enjoy taking outdoor walks and drinking a cup of coffee on a public bench. Many people who exercise find it difficult to do so in a mask. “It feels a bit like suffocating,” Shannon Palus wrote in Slate.

I’ve noticed that some of the clearest voices against Covid absolutism are researchers who have spent much of their careers studying HIV, including Cevik, Julia Marcus, Sarit Golub and Aaron Richterman. They know the history. The demonization of sex during the AIDS crisis contributed to more unsafe sex. If all sex is bad, why focus on safe sex?

There is a similar dynamic with Covid. “People do not have unlimited energy, so we should ask them to be vigilant where it matters most,” Cevik has written.

Telling Americans to wear masks when they’re unnecessary undermines efforts to persuade more people to wear masks where they are vital. Remember: Americans are not doing a particularly good job of wearing masks when they make a big difference, indoors and when people are close together outdoors.

Banning college students from outdoor walks won’t make them stay inside their dorm rooms for weeks on end. But it probably will increase the chances that they surreptitiously gather indoors.

And spending money on deep cleaning leaves less money for safety measures that will protect people, like faster vaccination.

“Rules that are really more about showing that you’re doing something versus doing something that’s actually effective” are counterproductive, Marcus told my colleague Ian Prasad Philbrick. “Trust is the currency of public health.”

NYT morning feed...you can get it free in your email
(By David Leonhardt

Good morning. We look at the debate over coronavirus absolutism.)

[Cunt]

Yeah, they are starting to sound like Weinstein and Heying. If they aren't careful, they'll be painted as 'right-wing-nut-jobs'.

There is a similar dynamic with Covid. “People do not have unlimited energy, so we should ask them to be vigilant where it matters most,” Cevik has written.

Compliance has always been a concern of mine. Humans don't do very well with it. It's why only some of us are allowed to be surgeons. The rest of us don't even get to watch.

As to the AIDS crisis, yeah...it is disconcerting to me, to hear people getting angry at non-compliance...blaming the disease on the people who have it. It seems we should have learned something from the freaks back then...

[NineBerry]

Use condoms / dental dams if you have sex with someone you are not in a long-term relationship with (and who doesn't do sex on the side). Easy. Doesn't only prevent AIDS but a whole host of other STDs.

[Cunt]

Are you old enough to remember how the freaks were vilified for 'spreading disease' back when AIDS was frightening people?

[NineBerry]

Yes. Politicians advocated putting gays into camps or on islands. Which is stupid because it's easy to avoid having sex with people while it's not easy to avoid breathing air exhaled by other people. I don't appreciate calling people freaks that don't behave freakish. And yes, not using condoms while a deadly STI is going around is anti-social and stupid.

[Strontium Dog]

Speaking of condoms, if wet cloth stops viruses, why do they bother to make condoms from latex? Surely an old sock would do just as well?

[Tero]

Speaking of condoms, if wet cloth stops viruses, why do they bother to make condoms from latex? Surely an old sock would do just as well?

Er, they swim. Viruses have no locomotion.

Here is some review about the birds and bees that you forgot from middle school biology:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DGyRD9HnXVs

[Scot Dutchy]

But the people in those urban centres live and work just as cheek-to-jowl as any other developed town or city. Australia might be a big, empty place relatively speaking, but it's not like Australian houses, restaurant tables, desks, or seats on the bus are further apart than anywhere else.

But they are separate and very much so. Only five concentrations and no high density living. Plenty of American styled car dependent suburbs. A city planners nightmare but easily to isolate.

[Cunt]

Yes. Politicians advocated putting gays into camps or on islands. Which is stupid because it's easy to avoid having sex with people while it's not easy to avoid breathing air exhaled by other people. I don't appreciate calling people freaks that don't behave freakish. And yes, not using condoms while a deadly STI is going around is anti-social and stupid.

I call them freaks because they are. If you have a statistical universe, and a few data points are WAY out there, they are freaks. No judgement from me, my most beloved friends have identified as freaks.

I understand your resistance, since freaks is also used as a perjorative. It's me using it though. Look at my avatar, and my position (statistically) and tell me you understand?

Not using condoms is stupid, sure. How good is compliance though?

I know you would NEVER do something stupid which might spread disease, but most people are like, well, most people.