|
Which horse film is your favorite? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Black Beauty |
|
2 | 1.06% |
| A Talking Pony!?! |
|
4 | 2.13% |
| Mr. Hands 2x Apple Flavor |
|
117 | 62.23% |
| War Horse |
|
11 | 5.85% |
| Mr. Hands |
|
54 | 28.72% |
| Total: | 188 votes | ||
|
If someone is boosted and wears an EHMR their exhaust is not going to be a major vector for disease spread. If we're at the point of worrying about that sort of person spreading COVID we sure as gently caress should not be letting people out of their homes.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 13:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:50 |
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Negative PCR results for the family. Just a bad cold for my youngest after all. I'm really glad to hear that. I was keeping you and your family in my thoughts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 13:32
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:Your PMs should be back soon, I will still ask about the av text for you since I haven't gotten any avs yet to send up to admins. I don't need any freebies, I'm fond of my old ironknuckles and I WANT NOTHING gangtag so feel free to give my spot to someone else 🥰
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 13:36
|
|
|
Just to make sure I'm understanding this correctly - I was under the impression that EHMRs (elastomeric half-mask respirators) DO protect the wearer, but they, because they have essentially open exhaust, do NOT necessarily protect your neighbors. I purchased a couple a month ago in the event that things get worse - like, a "I don't care about protecting others anymore and just need the most effective mask that will last the longest in hellworld" type of scenario. Are they still effective for that? Just as an emergency backup in the event that say, KN95s/N95s are no longer available?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 14:21
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Assuming that people couldn't possibly have Covid because of _______ is how we got to this point. Pretty slippery slope you've got there
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 14:23
|
|
|
Legato posted:"I don't care about protecting others anymore and just need the most effective mask that will last the longest in hellworld" Yes they're very effective at that
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 14:24
|
|
|
Why not go for source control if given the opportunity though? If the choice was between garbage self-protection but decent source control (i.e. cloth masks), and great self-protection but questionable source control, sure, by all means, go for the self-protection in a low mask compliance environment. But N95s aren't that - as long as you're not taking excessive risks, they're very effective at both source control and self-protection. I'm coming from an environment where mask compliance is good though (95+% in public indoor settings) so I could totally get how someone in a mask-free environment could think differently. Side note on mask sourcing - I've been using the FN95s from here https://canadastrongmasks.ca/ (ignore the chuddy domain name, as far as I can tell it's just an unfortunate coincidence) and am pretty happy with them - no issues forming a seal and way less sketchy than buying who knows what from Amazon. They have kids masks as well which are supposed to be 95% filtration, they're more in line with KF94 style masks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 14:32
|
|
|
Legato posted:Just to make sure I'm understanding this correctly - I was under the impression that EHMRs (elastomeric half-mask respirators) DO protect the wearer, but they, because they have essentially open exhaust, do NOT necessarily protect your neighbors. An elastomeric with P100 carts will provide 100% protection to you. Unless you have one of a very few very new masks (you dont) it also has an exhalation valve which offers little protection to others. Now if you're in a place where nobody is masking well, whatever, but it's why guidance on them recommends wearing a mask over the exhalation valve as they arent really designed for source control. One or two have filters you can buy for the exhalation valve as well N95s and KN94s offer slightly less, though definitely a huge amount of, protection but you also will not be a source So it sounds like they'd be perfect for what you describe. At the very least, you will not get sick, and the carts last a long time when you're filtering normal air
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 14:34
|
|
|
Looks like China has another outbreak, we'll see how they do with it. Pretty small, and concentrated in unvaccinated schoolkids.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 15:58
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:An elastomeric with P100 carts will provide 100% protection to you. Unless you have one of a very few very new masks (you dont) it also has an exhalation valve which offers little protection to others. Now if you're in a place where nobody is masking well, whatever, but it's why guidance on them recommends wearing a mask over the exhalation valve as they arent really designed for source control. One or two have filters you can buy for the exhalation valve as well The 3M 6100, 6200, and 6300 has the proper valve for a fitted source control filter, and are fairly common (defined as I can buy them on Amazon). The 604 Exhalation Valve Filter is the part you need to make it source controlled. https://www.rshughes.com/p/3M-604-Exhalation-Valve-Filter-638060-43195/638060_43195/ I have not been able to find this bit outside of industrial supply sources. edit: Added the specific mask numbers for use with the 604. Honestly, that thing could probably be 3D printed within tolerance and fitted with an O-ring from a hardware store for seal and a filter from any number of small filter manufacturers. Warmachine fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Sep 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 17:04
|
|
|
SubG posted:I guess. I think presenting a back and forth on unfiltered exhalation valves on FFRs vs EHMRs kinda buries the lede, though. Which is that it's kinda a moot point because you really shouldn't be relying on an unfiltered exhaust valve on an FFR for source control either. Like instead of a back and forth on the subject I kinda feel like the important information is that masks with unfiltered exhaust valves shouldn't be used for source control at all. That's the lede. We're only talking about FFR vs EHMR exhaust valves because people keep getting confused by that NIOSH paper on FFRs and are assuming it says something it does not. But even if it did apply to EHMRs...it still wouldn't matter because you shouldn't be relying on unfiltered exhalation on FFRs for source control either. I personally feel that N95s are good enough for me, but not everyone is living in the same place with the same current covid situation. But I'm happy to look back over the OP and make it clear what current guidance is, because it is a little messy right now just due to the way I sourced it with the thread's participation. I personally feel the level of discourse in here is decent enough for that kind of conversation, but you're probably right about someone lurking the OP and I'll look into a better way to present that. I am definitely hoping to have enough energy to maintain a frequently updated OP simply due to the nature of an ongoing pandemic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 17:25
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:Negative PCR results for the family. Just a bad cold for my youngest after all. That's a huge relief, good to hear it!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 17:26
|
|
|
Hey Beetus, do you want to include the live youtube feed I sent you of global Covid data updated in realtime? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMre6IAAAiU
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 17:54
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:Hey Beetus, do you want to include the live youtube feed I sent you of global Covid data updated in realtime? Absolutely, I spaced on it. A lot going on between medical follow ups and the final fantasy pixel remasters coming out. lemme know if you want a new av since you already have plat, or just send me the image/text  Minor updates made on 9/14/21, added YT feed of covid stats and link to reading material about the anti-vax movement(s). Also cleaned up mask guidance conversation and made Blackadder's important resource post more prominent. Phigs posted:If someone is boosted and wears an EHMR their exhaust is not going to be a major vector for disease spread. 
Professor Beetus fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Sep 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:Absolutely, I spaced on it. A lot going on between medical follow ups and the final fantasy pixel remasters coming out. TY!! Is it possible for you to give a gangtag?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 21:10
|
|
|
My sister died last year at a very young age, ostensibly as a result of alcoholism. But I was thinking about her today and looking at the awful statistics, reading the OP and reading UCS Hellmaker's great post about the physiological effects of Covid-19. As far as I know nobody in the hospital ever even mentioned Covid as a possible cause of her cirrhosis, but I got to wondering. I found this article from the journal Hepatology Communications.Hepatology Communications posted:From the start of this new virus pandemic, it was apparent that obese and/or diabetic individuals had a bad prognosis for COVID-19 progression, strongly suggesting an association between liver disease and severe COVID-19. Because chronic liver disease (CLD) is associated with immune dysregulation and inflammation, it is unsurprising that patients with CLD may carry a greater risk of adverse outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Initial COVID-19 data have also indicated that healthy infected individuals display abnormal liver function tests, suggesting a possible direct implication of SARS-CoV-2 in liver damage. Here we show that COVID-19 affects the liver metabolism and increases the morbidity and mortality of individuals with underlying CLD. Now, my sister absolutely had a drinking problem, but it didn't seem like a "kill you before your kids are out of elementary school" type of drinking problem. It's absolutely crazy to me that nobody that I know has brought this up in the year+ since she died, but it seems incredibly probable to me that a Covid infection greatly accelerated her liver disease and ultimately killed her. People (not in this thread, obviously, but people) talk about "oh, covid deaths are over-reported because they say anybody who died with covid died from it." But she tested negative in the hospital (don't know if they did an antibody test), and I would guess that her death was not recorded as a Covid death, which implies that Covid deaths could actually be underreported. It's been hard thinking about this today but I'm glad I can share it with the thread, and would be interested if anybody had any similar anecdotes or additional knowledge about the effect of Covid infections on the liver. I want to talk to my family about it, when I can find the right time, because obviously we've all been very hard on ourselves about not being aware of the extent of her drinking. I always thought of her as an indirect victim of Covid, via increasing her drinking during lockdown, but now I feel like it's very possible she was in fact a direct victim.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
Oh my god, one of our family friends whole family has COVID. Almost all of them have symptoms, and they all just got their first shot before getting it. Bad timing, but whatever, at least they're finally getting their shots. I told him let me know if they need dinner or groceries or beer. He replied and just said "nah, I was just at Sam's Club, we're good."  x100
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 21:34
|
|
|
I had an inflamed liver for a year after mono and I was advised not to drink
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
I feel pretty drat fortunate that I've managed to keep myself in relatively good shape wrt to diabetes. I sure as poo poo wouldn't be the one going into all the stores if I had any liver disease from it.Fallom posted:I had an inflamed liver for a year after mono and I was advised not to drink Seems like good advice tbh
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
We had a series of bad storms, either hurricane near-misses or remnants of one, which kicked up a lot of allergens. So when we had a house BBQ and my dad was sneezing and coughing, we didn't think much of it, because bad sinuses run in my family. Then a few days later, one by one all the adults in the house felt sick with sore throats and congestion. We got rapid and PCR tests and they've all come back negative. Somehow my daughter didn't feel sick until last night, which sucks for many reasons. We thought she dodged it. She also went back to in-school learning after 1.5 years of remote learning, so she's only had three days in class and now has to wait until her strep + PCR tests come back and she's symptom-free. Which uh, totally 100% understandable, but she's missing the formative days of her school year because Open 'er Up means there's no alternative. I feel like a finger curled on the monkey's paw because I was wishing there was a way to have her start a week or two later to see if there were any major outbreaks. I'm better in all ways except congestion, but this sucks. Even if COVID you were guaranteed that COVID for you would be "just a bad cold", why wouldn't you want to take a vaccine to avoid sleepless nights tossing and turning because you can't breathe through your nose? Being sick sucks. Recovering from a cold and trying to keep lingering congestion from turning into bronchitis sucks. Missing work/school/doctor appointments because no one wants you around when you sound like death sucks. Even a tiny cold can tear through a house, and this probably wasn't nearly as contagious as COVID.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 22:54
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:My sister died last year at a very young age, ostensibly as a result of alcoholism. But I was thinking about her today and looking at the awful statistics, reading the OP and reading UCS Hellmaker's great post about the physiological effects of Covid-19. As far as I know nobody in the hospital ever even mentioned Covid as a possible cause of her cirrhosis, but I got to wondering. I found this article from the journal Hepatology Communications.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:00
|
|
|
Legato posted:Just to make sure I'm understanding this correctly - I was under the impression that EHMRs (elastomeric half-mask respirators) DO protect the wearer, but they, because they have essentially open exhaust, do NOT necessarily protect your neighbors. Even with the valve uncovered they offer better protection to others than surgical masks https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2021-107/default.html quote:These findings show that FFRs with an exhalation valve provide respiratory protection to the wearer and can also reduce particle emissions to levels similar to or better than those provided by surgical masks, procedure masks, or cloth face coverings. The main push against them is preventing medical workers from having them, and scaring people too much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:05
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:I personally feel that N95s are good enough for me, but not everyone is living in the same place with the same current covid situation. But I'm happy to look back over the OP and make it clear what current guidance is, because it is a little messy right now just due to the way I sourced it with the thread's participation. Vasukhani posted:Even with the valve uncovered they offer better protection to others than surgical masks
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
SubG posted:
True, but I guess this is just lay speculation, why would a better, sturdier mask preform worse?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:09
|
|
|
SubG posted:I mean the last page has been mostly people arguing about whether or not you should care about source control (!), asking questions about what kind of protection EHMRs provide, and people reiterating the information about the 3M 6000 series with a 604 exhalation filter, and so on. Which seems to be what happens every time any of those subjects comes up. So it seems like exactly the sort of thing that would make sense to be in the OP. And...and this is a question...does the thread have a no misinformation rule? Like if someone came in and started extolling the virtues of Ivermectin would the be told to cut it out? If so, it might make sense to actually assert a position on e.g. masking. Hold up, is this a problem with the CDC's readily-available literature on NIOSH, or something else? If you've got something, show it; I'd like to put it before GEMA for consideration Thursday
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:12
|
|
|
Don't think this has been posted yet: https://twitter.com/megtirrell/status/1437813929753853958 tl;dr Pfizer is still expecting the 5-11 data end of this month which means EUA early October (and approval sometime in October). But more importantly they're expecting under 5 data/EUA in November now, not early next year as previously thought.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
Why is the process for children so much longer? This is absurd. The costs of kids getting critically ill from covid is much higher the risk of a few side effects.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:Why is the process for children so much longer? This is absurd. The costs of kids getting critically ill from covid is much higher the risk of a few side effects. That may be your judgement, but I don't think its the judgement of the medical community or most of society. We want to be careful with our kids. Man, it is going to be incredible in 2022 when we are able to vaccinate all the kids. I think that will really allow us to turn the corner on this pandemic, and hopefully getting back to a more normal life will coincide perfectly with the midterms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:True, but I guess this is just lay speculation, why would a better, sturdier mask preform worse? Potato Salad posted:Hold up, is this a problem with the CDC's readily-available literature on NIOSH, or something else?
So it's not that NIOSH is spreading misinformation, it's just that information from NIOSH is frequently (I think it's safe to say consistently) in a misleading way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:21
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:Why is the process for children so much longer? This is absurd. The costs of kids getting critically ill from covid is much higher the risk of a few side effects. It started much later for no good reason. They didn't start until the beginning of this year getting their pediatric trials in order. The AAP had been haranguing Pfizer, CDC, etc. for months prior begging them to start child trials sooner because they knew it would be critical to get it done ASAP. Here's a letter they wrote in November last year saying that point: https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/ne...-of-pediatrics/ All of this was ignored by the CDC and others and trials didn't start in earnest until March this year. It is either pure hubris/stupidity or a deplorable failure of government to anticipate the dire circumstances we would be in months later and the consequences of delaying these trials.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
How are u posted:We want to be careful with our kids. So send em to school unvaxxed with a disease that leads to permanent cognitive decline in adults and long covid in 1/10 children? How could anything in the vaccine be more harmful than that? Well intended action is usually better than fearful inaction. https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...urce=reddit.com wisconsingreg fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Sep 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:Why is the process for children so much longer? It's not. A decision was made to start the process later for children, because "kids don't get or spread covid" This may have been a bad move.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
How are u posted:That may be your judgement, but I don't think its the judgement of the medical community or most of society. We want to be careful with our kids. On top of wanting to be careful with kids in general, think of what just one botched vaccine testing program leading to serious side effects in kids would do to vaccine acceptance in the long term. Slow approval hurts us with this disease, fast approval can hurt us with every disease to come.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:35
|
|
|
SubG posted:I mean the last page has been mostly people arguing about whether or not you should care about source control (!), asking questions about what kind of protection EHMRs provide, and people reiterating the information about the 3M 6000 series with a 604 exhalation filter, and so on. Which seems to be what happens every time any of those subjects comes up. So it seems like exactly the sort of thing that would make sense to be in the OP. And...and this is a question...does the thread have a no misinformation rule? Like if someone came in and started extolling the virtues of Ivermectin would the be told to cut it out? If so, it might make sense to actually assert a position on e.g. masking. I did add an edit to say that for most people the N95s are what they should be wearing to protect themselves and others and made some edits to the quotes to remove more contentious bits. I think that makes sense enough for now. As to misinformation, it's not an official rule or anything but I will absolutely nuke poo poo like someone coming in pushing ivermectin or basequin or whatever the next bullshit is. As far as the stuff like preprints, in progress studies, etc etc, it's not as easy to separate the wheat from the chaff, which is why I also made a disclaimer about taking medical advice from strangers on the internet. I am not going to make a "no asking about masks" rule. I really appreciate the criticism and will be earnestly trying to keep improving the OP, I don't want it to be stale. Maybe check the OP should be a thread rule, since I have a big announcement at the top of the page explicitly stating when the OP was last updated with new info. Vasukhani posted:Why is the process for children so much longer? This is absurd. The costs of kids getting critically ill from covid is much higher the risk of a few side effects. Please don't take this the wrong way, but if you want to remain unthreadbanned, please try to be mindful of whether or not you're getting too worked up reading this thread or the news. I'm happy to have you here, just like everyone else, as long as we can keep things civil. Everyone in the thread is making risk assessments for themselves and their families and someone else's risk assessment may look a lot different from yours.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:fast approval can hurt us with every disease to come. A problem completely negated by making vaccination not a personal choice. I don't get it. So much of modern life is unconsentual, the idea that suggesting the most basic public health measures should also be is somehow beyond precedent is an idea that has entered the mainstream by way of antivaxxers and is now seen as reasonable politics. wisconsingreg fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Sep 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:37
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:A problem completly negated by making vaccination not a personal choice. You missed the part in your hypothetical where the public now associates compulsory vaccination with piles of dead kids.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:40
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:Please don't take this the wrong way, but if you want to remain unthreadbanned, please try to be mindful of whether or not you're getting too worked up reading this thread or the news. I'm happy to have you here, just like everyone else, as long as we can keep things civil. Everyone in the thread is making risk assessments for themselves and their families and someone else's risk assessment may look a lot different from yours. What exactly is the rule being broken here? You are not allowed to get too upset while reading the thread? What exactly is uncivil about their question? Help us understand what your thought process is here because that sounds completely biased and arbitrary to enforce. It's a simple question being asked and a simple answer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:42
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:You missed the part in your hypothetical where the public now associates compulsory vaccination with piles of dead kids. Nonsense, we already have plenty of compulsory vaccines for kids to go to school. Society hasn't fallen apart despite a small set of antivaxxers against even those existing vaccinations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
SubG posted:This is literally discussed in the OP. As long as we’re playing devil’s advocate, I would like it to be known that the 604 is rated for bacteria. No representation is made as to its competence in filtering viruses. https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1971617O/en-us-70-2011-8190-9-lr.pdf The existence and approval of the 604 filter allows healthcare workers to wear 6100/6200/6300 respirators in environments where surgical masks are acceptable (or would have been before the present pandemic), like operating rooms. I don’t have any personal doubt that it would easily surpass unfitted surgical masks at stopping virus‐containing respiratory viruses, but, well, we don’t have any actual data saying it does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:50 |
|
|
mod sassinator posted:It started much later for no good reason. They didn't start until the beginning of this year getting their pediatric trials in order. The AAP had been haranguing Pfizer, CDC, etc. for months prior begging them to start child trials sooner because they knew it would be critical to get it done ASAP. Here's a letter they wrote in November last year saying that point: https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/ne...-of-pediatrics/ All of this was ignored by the CDC and others and trials didn't start in earnest until March this year. During any trials on kids is a massive undertaking, any research on pediatrics and pregnant woman is. Doing it in a rushed slapdash manner can and will cause more issues then the current antivax ferver, ie people comparing it to the things mengala did in the 1940s. Like seriously don't spout bullshit when you don't understand the actual things involved with human trials and the sheer effort required to even begin pediatric tests.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2021 23:45
|
|