Why young people are speading the virus

[stereologist]

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/09/millennials-generation-z-coronavirus-scapegoating-beach-parties-bars-inequality-cvd/?cmpid=org=ngp::mc=crm-email::src=ngp::cmp=editorial::add=SpecialEdition_20200918&rid=1325F4460235597B0F183E56A3336D8D

Quote

When it comes to Millennials and Generation Z—defined by the Pew Research Center as people born after 1982 and 1996 respectively—stories of crowded beach gatherings and house parties where guests try to infect each other with COVID-19 have made headlines. But those stories obscure the more complicated circumstances of people, such as Chen and his patient, shaped by economic and societal inequality. An August 18 briefing from the World Health Organization announced that people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are now driving the virus’s spread, but that’s because most are just trying to do their jobs.

The WHO suggests that it is employment that is driving the spread of the disease and not being careless.

Quote

“In the past few decades, we’ve seen a shift in the economy toward more service jobs,” including retail, food service, hospitality, and childcare, says Sharon Sassler, a professor of policy analysis and management at Cornell University. “Young people in those service jobs are now at a greater risk of being exposed.” What’s more, emerging research is confirming what many experts have observed with natural disasters: economic vulnerability severely impairs a person’s ability to cope with catastrophe, and this burden falls heavily on younger generations.

This idea that it is work related spreading of the disease is agreed to by many researchers.

Quote

Even though people 18 to 34 are less likely to die from the coronavirus, they aren’t totally spared. In the United States, one in five hospitalized young adults has required intensive care.

 

[acute]

Younger people, around here anyway, seem to have given up on social distancing altogether.

[stereologist]

One of the issues often brought up is whether or not restaurants are the place where the young spread the virus.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/937430?nlid=137411_4622&src=WNL_mdplsnews_200918_mscpedit_nurs&uac=389284HY&spon=24&impID=2572741&faf=1

Quote

Restaurants appear to play a key role in the spread of COVID-19, researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) say.

"Masks cannot be effectively worn while eating and drinking, whereas shopping and numerous other indoor activities do not preclude mask use," write Kiva A. Fisher, PhD, from the CDC, and colleagues.

Quote

Those who tested positive were 2.4 times more likely to have dined at a restaurant in the 2 weeks prior to falling ill (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.4; 95% CI, 1.5 – 3.8). In the study, restaurant dining included being seated at a patio, being seated outdoors, or being seated indoors.

Quote

The researchers note limitations to their study. Notably, many of those they contacted refused to participate, and there could be differences in participation among those who tested positive and those who tested negative.

 

[HandsomeGorilla]

3 hours ago, acute said:

Younger people, around here anyway, seem to have given up on social distancing altogether.

Here in the states, too. I mean they opened bars before other things, wtf? You go to bars to socialize and have a drink and bars have been getting GREAT business, as you'd imagine. 

I'm glad I don't like people, in general. I socially distance by default. 

[spartan max2]

The parties haven't stopped on the college campus in town.

[Dejarma]

17 minutes ago, HandsomeGorilla said:

I'm glad I don't like people, in general.

so why are you in here talking to people?

[+and-then]

Why?  Because they're immature and have priorities that seem more important to them than the chance of getting ill.  I've had 4 family members contract this virus.  All recovered with relatively mild symptoms.  The fatality rate for this virus is not far out of scale with seasonal influenza.  If it WERE as deadly as the panic stricken media and government shills say... people would behave much differently.  They don't because they have not seen widespread evidence that causes them to fear.

[Dejarma]

17 minutes ago, and then said:

Why?  Because they're immature and have priorities that seem more important to them than the chance of getting ill.  I've had 4 family members contract this virus.  All recovered with relatively mild symptoms.  The fatality rate for this virus is not far out of scale with seasonal influenza.  If it WERE as deadly as the panic stricken media and government shills say... people would behave much differently.  They don't because they have not seen widespread evidence that causes them to fear.

 

yep, I have to agree with that.... check the annual influenza/pneumonia death rate world wide- why no lockdown over the years for this?

Edited September 20, 2020 by Dejarma

[+susieice]

2 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

The parties haven't stopped on the college campus in town.

A lot of the colleges here have this problem.

[Katniss]

Well for one thing it's the way this awful virus goes after patients with preexisting conditions, that includes all ages. Patients would have a better survival rate with the common flu without having to rely on ventilators. Think about those differences between the two.

And the other thing is that we don't have a vaccine available for it yet and not everybody wants to get this virus, just like not everybody wants to get the common flu regardless if we do have a vaccine for that. Very few would want to have to stay home from work with the flu, so why should we think different with this Covid-19 virus?

[Tatetopa]

2 hours ago, and then said:

Why?  Because they're immature and have priorities that seem more important to them than the chance of getting ill.  I've had 4 family members contract this virus.  All recovered with relatively mild symptoms.  The fatality rate for this virus is not far out of scale with seasonal influenza. 

Sorry to hear about the first part, glad to hear about the second.

 

[thedutchiedutch]

3 hours ago, and then said:

Why?  Because they're immature and have priorities that seem more important to them than the chance of getting ill.  I've had 4 family members contract this virus.  All recovered with relatively mild symptoms.  The fatality rate for this virus is not far out of scale with seasonal influenza.  If it WERE as deadly as the panic stricken media and government shills say... people would behave much differently.  They don't because they have not seen widespread evidence that causes them to fear.

That's funny that you mentioned that because earlier today I looked up how many people yearly die in the United States of the influenza and compared it with the numbers of Covid-19. I was surprised to learn that during the 2018/2019 season, an estimated 35.5 million people got sick and unfortunately 34,200 people died because of seasonal influenza.
Covid-19 so far, in the United States, an estimated 6.9 million people got sick and 203,824 people died so far. This virus is pretty deadly compared to the regular influenza seasons. i am not sure why people don't get this.

[+joc]

 

 

5 minutes ago, thedutchiedutch said:

Covid-19 so far, in the United States, an estimated 6.9 million people got sick and 203,824 people died so far. This virus is pretty deadly compared to the regular influenza seasons. i am not sure why people don't get this.

You are talking about 3 percent.   Which yes is much higher than the .1% death rate of influenza...but...When you compare it to the population of the  United States...it is so miniscule as to not even appear as a blip on anyone's radar...so what is all the hysteria about?  200,000  /  330,000,000  =  .06%  That is 'point zero six percent '

35,000 people die every year in car wrecks in the US.  Do you see anyone banning cars?  Hell, I rarely see cops giving out tickets anymore. 

This supposed 'pandemic' is the biggest charade of our entire life.

Why is there no isopropyl alcohol available after months and months of this 'pandemic'?   Why is the whole world in a hysteria from a virus that has killed (supposedly) .04% of the worlds population. Not 4% mind you...not .4%...but .04%.   And we are all supposed to be so afraid of this deadly virus... mind you, a virus that makes some people kind of sick, some not at all, and kills others, mostly people who were knocking on deaths door anyway.

Why are we told a mask can stop a virus when in the beginning we were told it couldn't.  Why are we told that a mask can stop a virus from going out of it, but not from coming into it?  And why are people across the globe gullible enough to actually believe this crap? 

How many people know...not know of...but actually know even one person who has died?  How many of you know...not know someone that knows someone but actually know of one person who has even tested positive.  One of my daughters friends tested positive.  She's fine.   

How many people contracted Polio and were 'fine'?  How many people contracted  small pox and were 'fine'?  Or Rabies and were 'fine'.  Or Ebola and were 'fine'?

[stereologist]

14 hours ago, and then said:

Why?  Because they're immature and have priorities that seem more important to them than the chance of getting ill.  I've had 4 family members contract this virus.  All recovered with relatively mild symptoms.  The fatality rate for this virus is not far out of scale with seasonal influenza.  If it WERE as deadly as the panic stricken media and government shills say... people would behave much differently.  They don't because they have not seen widespread evidence that causes them to fear.

That is completely and utterly wrong. The seasonal flu kills around 60,000 people a year in the US. We are approaching 200,00 and the year is not over.  It is over 3x deadlier than the normal flu. And over 10% of those that surviive exhibit organ damage. The smallest number I saw was 12% so by saying 10% I am being careful.

Here is a repeated mistake: "If it WERE as deadly as the panic stricken media and government shills say... people would behave much differently. "

Seems you continue to be out of touch with the facts. In the 1918 pandemic one of the reasons that so many people died in the US. Is they went back to work in the factories and the second wave slaughtered people. A lack of respect for a hazard does not change the nature of the hazard.

[stereologist]

13 hours ago, Dejarma said:

 

yep, I have to agree with that.... check the annual influenza/pneumonia death rate world wide- why no lockdown over the years for this?

There have been lock downs for the more lethal flu strains. A problem with the flu is its amazing ability to mutate. Vaccines try to guess which strain of the flu is going to be the prevalent strain in any particular area of the globe. The predictions are not always correct. Not everyone gets vaccinated. These allow the flu to spread through the population.

But there is no cure or vaccine for COVID-19. There is a flu vaccine.

[stereologist]

9 hours ago, joc said:

You are talking about 3 percent.   Which yes is much higher than the .1% death rate of influenza...but...When you compare it to the population of the  United States...it is so miniscule as to not even appear as a blip on anyone's radar...so what is all the hysteria about?  200,000  /  330,000,000  =  .06%  That is 'point zero six percent '

35,000 people die every year in car wrecks in the US.  Do you see anyone banning cars?  Hell, I rarely see cops giving out tickets anymore. 

This supposed 'pandemic' is the biggest charade of our entire life.

Why is there no isopropyl alcohol available after months and months of this 'pandemic'?   Why is the whole world in a hysteria from a virus that has killed (supposedly) .04% of the worlds population. Not 4% mind you...not .4%...but .04%.   And we are all supposed to be so afraid of this deadly virus... mind you, a virus that makes some people kind of sick, some not at all, and kills others, mostly people who were knocking on deaths door anyway.

Why are we told a mask can stop a virus when in the beginning we were told it couldn't.  Why are we told that a mask can stop a virus from going out of it, but not from coming into it?  And why are people across the globe gullible enough to actually believe this crap? 

How many people know...not know of...but actually know even one person who has died?  How many of you know...not know someone that knows someone but actually know of one person who has even tested positive.  One of my daughters friends tested positive.  She's fine.   

How many people contracted Polio and were 'fine'?  How many people contracted  small pox and were 'fine'?  Or Rabies and were 'fine'.  Or Ebola and were 'fine'?

So you would just as soon kill off 200,000 because 35,000 died in car wrecks.

And dividing the number of dead by the entire population is really dumb. Less than 2% of the US population has been infected. Infecting everyone is 50 time the number of current cases.

So if everyone gets infected then we have 50 times 200,000 or 10,000,000 dead.

Using the crude mortality rate early in an epidemic is what is known as a charade. It was 0 and it keeps growing and will grow and grow and grow until it matches the CFR which in the US is 0.2/6.8 (numbers in millions)  which is 2.9%. That means that for every 100 that get the disease 2.9 die.

Let's take this foolishness 1 at a time:

Quote

Why are we told a mask can stop a virus when in the beginning we were told it couldn't.  Why are we told that a mask can stop a virus from going out of it, but not from coming into it?  And why are people across the globe gullible enough to actually believe this crap? 

This is a new virus, aka a novel virus. What does it do? No one was sure at the start. So here we are 9 months later and much wiser. But people like you want to mix old information with the most recent information to pretend people still don't know more about the virus. That sounds like someone trying to pull a charade, a hoax, disseminating VD viral disinformation.

1. Early on BEFORE they knew the virus was in the US, authorities were concerned about panic buying of PPE and told people not to use masks. In mid-January the WHO announced human to human transmission was confirmed. After it entered the US masks were recommended. That was March. So use a timeline and that avoids these mistakes.
2. Initially, masks were known to prevent someone projecting viruses to other people. What was not known was if the masks stopped droplets from entering another person's mask. That took testing and it has been shown that, this is important, that cloth masks help in both directions. The health officials correctly waiting for testing before making a statement.
3. And people rely on testing. The real question is why do people not understand the situation? Why are people close minded and after having been corrected a dozen times continue to be ignorant of the facts of the situation? My guess is that they listen to some political outlet that doesn't care about human lives.

[+joc]

1 hour ago, stereologist said:

So you would just as soon kill off 200,000 because 35,000 died in car wrecks.

And dividing the number of dead by the entire population is really dumb. Less than 2% of the US population has been infected. Infecting everyone is 50 time the number of current cases.

So if everyone gets infected then we have 50 times 200,000 or 10,000,000 dead.

Using the crude mortality rate early in an epidemic is what is known as a charade. It was 0 and it keeps growing and will grow and grow and grow until it matches the CFR which in the US is 0.2/6.8 (numbers in millions)  which is 2.9%. That means that for every 100 that get the disease 2.9 die.

Let's take this foolishness 1 at a time:

This is a new virus, aka a novel virus. What does it do? No one was sure at the start. So here we are 9 months later and much wiser. But people like you want to mix old information with the most recent information to pretend people still don't know more about the virus. That sounds like someone trying to pull a charade, a hoax, disseminating VD viral disinformation.

1. Early on BEFORE they knew the virus was in the US, authorities were concerned about panic buying of PPE and told people not to use masks. In mid-January the WHO announced human to human transmission was confirmed. After it entered the US masks were recommended. That was March. So use a timeline and that avoids these mistakes.
2. Initially, masks were known to prevent someone projecting viruses to other people. What was not known was if the masks stopped droplets from entering another person's mask. That took testing and it has been shown that, this is important, that cloth masks help in both directions. The health officials correctly waiting for testing before making a statement.
3. And people rely on testing. The real question is why do people not understand the situation? Why are people close minded and after having been corrected a dozen times continue to be ignorant of the facts of the situation? My guess is that they listen to some political outlet that doesn't care about human lives.

We are definitely in agreement that too many people listen to political Persuasions. I have no idea what the Republicans think or what Trump thinks or what anybody else thinks. I have no idea what's going on in the world around me really. I know what's going on in my local community but I don't listen to the media because the media has been proven to be an outlet for leftist ideology and misinformation.  I might have been born in the back of a turnip truck at night but it wasn't last night. I followed this since before it was even a thing in the United States. I was tracking everything from day one. once @acute informed me of the exponential potential... I started following the exponential charts and websites. 

If the early exponential's of death rate doubling every other day had continued there would have been 18 million dead by the middle of April.  that never happened... the logistics curve of the exponential began early in the pandemic. We were told that the logistics curve happened because everyone was staying at home. That's a lie. It's not true. I know all of these things because I followed it religiously.

The one thing that I have not done which apparently everyone else has is hung on every single word of the media about this quote-unquote pandemic. I followed the data and used my brain to make my own figures. There is nothing wrong with my thought process. There is something wrong with following the media blindly. It's a sheep mentality attitude.

 

[stereologist]

3 minutes ago, joc said:

We are definitely in agreement that too many people listen to political Persuasions. I have no idea what the Republicans think or what Trump thinks or what anybody else thinks. I have no idea what's going on in the world around me really. I know what's going on in my local community but I don't listen to the media because the media has been proven to be an outlet for leftist ideology and misinformation.  I might have been born in the back of a turnip truck at night but it wasn't last night. I followed this since before it was even a thing in the United States. I was tracking everything from day one. once @acute informed me of the exponential potential... I started following the exponential charts and websites. 

If the early exponential's of death rate doubling every other day had continued there would have been 18 million dead by the middle of April.  that never happened... the logistics curve of the exponential began early in the pandemic. We were told that the logistics curve happened because everyone was staying at home. That's a lie. It's not true. I know all of these things because I followed it religiously.

The one thing that I have not done which apparently everyone else has is hung on every single word of the media about this quote-unquote pandemic. I followed the data and used my brain to make my own figures. There is nothing wrong with my thought process. There is something wrong with following the media blindly. It's a sheep mentality attitude.

 

You claim the following: "We were told that the logistics curve happened because everyone was staying at home. That's a lie. It's not true. "

Do you have any evidence for this lie you mention?

Do you also deny that is a pandemic?

You also suggest that you have this perfectly worked out yet you tell us nothing. I can quickly point out mistakes in your thought processes.

1. You use the crude mortality rate which is a value of no use early in an epidemic. You need to switch to the CFR.
2. You point this out: "If the early exponential's of death rate doubling every other day had continued there would have been 18 million dead by the middle of April." That means that reactions by the population prevented that from happening. In other words, the conditions that occurred early on were altered.
3. You also were not following this religiously as you claim if you did not understand the events affecting the mask decisions.
4. You also appear to neglect the high rate of organ damage observed in survivors. That is something anyone following this religiously should be aware of and concerned about.

[+joc]

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

You claim the following: "We were told that the logistics curve happened because everyone was staying at home. That's a lie. It's not true. "

Do you have any evidence for this lie you mention?

You concur with that in the following post:

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

ou point this out: "If the early exponential's of death rate doubling every other day had continued there would have been 18 million dead by the middle of April." That means that reactions by the population prevented that from happening. In other words, the conditions that occurred early on were altered.

The reactions by the population were...Staying at Home...

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

You also were not following this religiously as you claim if you did not understand the events affecting the mask decisions.

The data from the Mask manufactures stated that the only mask that would contain the virus was the N95...they also said that was only the case if the masks were fitted properly and changed frequently.

 

[acute]

2 hours ago, joc said:

The data from the Mask manufactures stated that the only mask that would contain the virus was the N95...they also said that was only the case if the masks were fitted properly and changed frequently.

This is correct ^ but not the whole story.

Regular surgical masks are worn, for example in operating theaters, to protect the patient.

But, in the case of an aerosol-borne virus such as Covid-19, a mask or any face covering worn in public also provides some protection to the wearer, because it hides a part of the face and prevents it from being sprayed with infected particles. (This is why the front of the mask or face covering should not be touched during removal)

You are right when you say that only N95 (or higher spec) masks are designed to protect the wearer in most (or all) circumstances.

 

Edited September 20, 2020 by acute
Clarity --- I hope!

[+joc]

53 minutes ago, acute said:

Regular surgical masks are worn, for example in operating theaters, to protect the patient.

However; the surgical masks worn by surgeons are part of a regimen of hand-washing repeatedly along with sterile clothing and instruments and a completely disinfected OR.  The reason is to protect the patient against bacterial infection...not viral infection.  Bacteria are somewhere around .4 micron but viruses are around .02 micron.

 

[acute]

I'm not heavily into microns, but a basic mask in an operating theater will prevent a surgeon, or anyone else present, from inadvertantly spraying aerosols over a patient's body and open wounds.

 

17 minutes ago, joc said:

The reason is to protect the patient against bacterial infection...not viral infection.

That's not strictly true, but it's why I made the distinction between "operating theaters" and "in public".

An anesthetized patient, being operated on, is unlikely to be coughing into your face, but a fellow shopper without a mask might.

 

Edited September 20, 2020 by acute

[stereologist]

3 hours ago, joc said:

You concur with that in the following post:

The reactions by the population were...Staying at Home...

The data from the Mask manufactures stated that the only mask that would contain the virus was the N95...they also said that was only the case if the masks were fitted properly and changed frequently.

 

There is nothing in my post concurring with what you stated. I never mentioned anything about staying at home.

And this is false "only mask that would contain the virus was the N95". The N95 is not the highest grade mask. The issue is not containing the virus, but the virus dispersal.

I already posted evidence that lower grade mask work.

Edited September 20, 2020 by stereologist

[stereologist]

45 minutes ago, joc said:

However; the surgical masks worn by surgeons are part of a regimen of hand-washing repeatedly along with sterile clothing and instruments and a completely disinfected OR.  The reason is to protect the patient against bacterial infection...not viral infection.  Bacteria are somewhere around .4 micron but viruses are around .02 micron.

 

False. False. False. This is BS: "against bacterial infection...not viral infection"

The size of the pathogen is not the issue, another falsehood.

[stereologist]

An N95 mask, not the best has 1 micron pores. These masks stop 0.3 micron droplets. Yes they do. This is why they stop 95% of the particles, not all, but 95% of particles.

As joc has correctly pointed out bacteria and viruses are smaller than that. So how do they work? Because these pathogens are not floating about freely in the air but are contained  in droplets.