4 ms·

Not your point but I think there is a definite issue here with perceptions around workplace safety. The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to

Not your point but I think there is a definite issue here with perceptions around workplace safety. The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to be blunt, just wear a mask and wash your hands...you will be okay. I understand why some groups of people are very worried: if you are obese, if you are over 60, if you work in a hospital/care home...but if you work in an office, it isn't a "Hunger Games" situation. I don't think furlough/unemployment schemes necessarily created that incentive though. People in some places are clearly being very cautious (I am in the UK, people aren't wearing masks and not being cautious at all...I have seen larger crowds at pubs than ever...no masks) anyway. So I think the solution to the unemployment problem is a change in message from govt. If you take precautions, you will be okay (again, where I am the message was very urgent and serious...this worked at first but some people are ignoring totally and others are staying at home terrified of their own shadow...so who knows? But I think it would have success generally).

slg 6y ago
>The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to be blunt, just wear a mask and wash your hands...you will be okay. If this is true, why is the outbreak here so much worse than basically any of our peer countries?
- refurb 6y ago
  How do you define worse? Number of deaths? If so, the US is doing better than many countries. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/8993658...
  - slg 6y ago
    Totals are misleading due to each countries varied handling of the initial pandemic. Our peers are not still struggling with this the way we continue to struggle. I did some quick math based off the numbers here as an example[1][2]. The UK has had 3.0 COVID-19 deaths over the last three days per million people. The US has had nearly four times that many deaths with 11.8 per million people in that same 3 day time frame. [1] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ [2] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
    - refurb 6y ago
      Sure, that might tell you how it’s going right now, but in the end you just care about the total impacted. And looking in the last 3 days is misleading since we know the pandemic hits in waves, at different times, across different countries.
      - slg 6y ago
        >Sure, that might tell you how it’s going right now, but in the end you just care about the total impacted. The problem is we aren't at the end yet. Any time frame you use is therefore going to give you an incomplete picture. I used the last three days because it shows that the US is clearly in a worse current position. That means we will continue creeping up that initial per capita list you linked. Maybe the UK, Spain, France, or Italy experience a second wave at some point down the line, but at least they have gotten past the first wave that the US still hasn't been able to stop.
        refurb 6y ago
        Gotcha. I agree we're not at the end (or even close) so it's premature to start naming winners and losers. Instead of saying "better" I should have said "has fewer per capita deaths so far".
  - ModernMech 6y ago
    There are about 50 countries with cases over 50k, 40 of which are missing from that chart. Being 8/50 is I think indicative of being worse. I think the statistic that shows just how bad the US is doing is that they account for 23% of the world's total Covid deaths but only 3% of the world total population. How can a country doing a good job have those kinds of numbers? But as you said in your other reply, we understand Covid to be a regional disease that comes in waves, washing over a region and then subsiding. For smaller, denser countries in Europe, it is easier for this disease to reach all regions. America is vast with a much lower population density, and the virus is taking its time finding its way around. However, if you break the US down into regions you can see how bad it is. NY state has a comparable population density to Italy (162 vs 200 for Italy), and both were hard hit at the beginning of this thing. New York state suffered 1,687 deaths per million, while Italy only suffered 582 deaths per million so far. This I think provides a more nuanced picture rather than just looking at deaths per million by country. Population density is really a factor here.
    - mensetmanusman 6y ago
      Exactly this, we need heat maps that are per capita focused so people can gauge risk.
humaniania 6y ago
That's not true. I know several people that work in the restaurant industry who have gotten COVID-19 while wearing PPE, probably because of how many people refuse to wear masks, or don't wear them properly. And it isn't just about getting infected yourself. How would you feel if you got infected and ended up accidentally infecting someone you love who ends up dying? There needs to be a national mandate and actual enforcement of mask wearing to stop the spread.
- powerslacker 6y ago
  > There needs to be a national mandate and actual enforcement of mask wearing to stop the spread. That assumes that the masks are as effective as claimed, that mass enforcement is even feasible, and that the Federal govt. has the right to create such a mandate. I don't believe we have enough data to know the efficacy of masks, especially handmade masks out in the field. Mass enforcement of mask wearing, even if it was somehow cost affordable to task law enforcement with, would likely be met with heavy protest or open revolt in the United States by various civil rights groups. There's nothing wrong with being concerned about safety, especially these days. However, it's not so simple as 'pass a mask law', and if you really think about it ... there's a silver lining there. Do you want to be ruled by a government who can tell you what to wear, when to wear it, how to wear it — even if you dissent? Once there is a precedent for a national mask law, the Federal government can use that to push for further loss of freedoms for individuals and states. I'm not saying the mask law concept is intentionally being pushed to erode freedoms, rather, that it has the potential to do so. Businesses can already refuse service for any reason not protected by Federal/State law. That's plenty of grounds to kick out a non mask wearer. I don't see the need for additional laws, enforcement, or government spending. Let businesses and employees decide the level of risk they are willing to take.
- mensetmanusman 6y ago
  Enough research is showing that aerosol covid is a major risk. If they weren’t wearing N95 masks...
- hogFeast 6y ago
  Correct, which is why I didn't say that no-one should be worried. I am saying that this doesn't apply for most people in most situations. And you want a national mandate to wear masks but you said that people wearing them got infected. Interesting take.
BoxFour 6y ago
something like 1/3 to 1/2 of the US is obese, so...
clairity 6y ago
moreover, many office workers, those with seats roughly 6 feet apart or with a partition of some sort, don't even need the mask. the people who need masks are front-line workers of all sorts, from grocery clerks to medical workers, who interact with strangers for extended periods of time, not people sitting at computers for most of the day. sure, when you have a meeting, wear a mask, but an LED screen won't give you covid.
- saltminer 6y ago
  If everyone in the office is clean, sure, but what about the HVAC technician you had to call in? The UPS driver who interacted with the mail room employees? What if your cube neighbor is exposed by a family member who is asymptomatic and ends up spreading it to half the row before they get their results back? Unless you want to test your employees every day and hope the test is accurate, you need masks.
  - clairity 6y ago
    no, none of those potential exposures are significant enough to warrant anything more than some distance. the virus falls to the ground and dies (even in the air) in droves all by itself. these aren't hardy viruses. you'd need to take an unnecessary risk like eating lunch in a group to create a significant exposure in that environment.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    What my company has said (when the office is currently slated to reopen in September) is that you need to wear a mask while walking around the office or talking to people, but not when you're sitting at your desk/computer. Our seating arrangements will be laid out such that everyone's desk has at least six feet of space. I'm... not sure... whether the science on this holds up, but it struck me as a good compromise. People expressed concern that wearing a mask for nine hours straight, without any breaks, would become very uncomfortable.

slg 6y ago

>The US has a very good level of testing/mask usage. And, to be blunt, just wear a mask and wash your hands...you will be okay. If this is true, why is the outbreak here so much worse than basically any of our peer countries?

refurb 6y ago
How do you define worse? Number of deaths? If so, the US is doing better than many countries. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/8993658...
- slg 6y ago
  Totals are misleading due to each countries varied handling of the initial pandemic. Our peers are not still struggling with this the way we continue to struggle. I did some quick math based off the numbers here as an example[1][2]. The UK has had 3.0 COVID-19 deaths over the last three days per million people. The US has had nearly four times that many deaths with 11.8 per million people in that same 3 day time frame. [1] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ [2] - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
  - refurb 6y ago
    Sure, that might tell you how it’s going right now, but in the end you just care about the total impacted. And looking in the last 3 days is misleading since we know the pandemic hits in waves, at different times, across different countries.
    - slg 6y ago
      >Sure, that might tell you how it’s going right now, but in the end you just care about the total impacted. The problem is we aren't at the end yet. Any time frame you use is therefore going to give you an incomplete picture. I used the last three days because it shows that the US is clearly in a worse current position. That means we will continue creeping up that initial per capita list you linked. Maybe the UK, Spain, France, or Italy experience a second wave at some point down the line, but at least they have gotten past the first wave that the US still hasn't been able to stop.
      - refurb 6y ago
        Gotcha. I agree we're not at the end (or even close) so it's premature to start naming winners and losers. Instead of saying "better" I should have said "has fewer per capita deaths so far".
- ModernMech 6y ago
  There are about 50 countries with cases over 50k, 40 of which are missing from that chart. Being 8/50 is I think indicative of being worse. I think the statistic that shows just how bad the US is doing is that they account for 23% of the world's total Covid deaths but only 3% of the world total population. How can a country doing a good job have those kinds of numbers? But as you said in your other reply, we understand Covid to be a regional disease that comes in waves, washing over a region and then subsiding. For smaller, denser countries in Europe, it is easier for this disease to reach all regions. America is vast with a much lower population density, and the virus is taking its time finding its way around. However, if you break the US down into regions you can see how bad it is. NY state has a comparable population density to Italy (162 vs 200 for Italy), and both were hard hit at the beginning of this thing. New York state suffered 1,687 deaths per million, while Italy only suffered 582 deaths per million so far. This I think provides a more nuanced picture rather than just looking at deaths per million by country. Population density is really a factor here.
  - mensetmanusman 6y ago
    Exactly this, we need heat maps that are per capita focused so people can gauge risk.

humaniania 6y ago

That's not true. I know several people that work in the restaurant industry who have gotten COVID-19 while wearing PPE, probably because of how many people refuse to wear masks, or don't wear them properly. And it isn't just about getting infected yourself. How would you feel if you got infected and ended up accidentally infecting someone you love who ends up dying? There needs to be a national mandate and actual enforcement of mask wearing to stop the spread.

powerslacker 6y ago
> There needs to be a national mandate and actual enforcement of mask wearing to stop the spread. That assumes that the masks are as effective as claimed, that mass enforcement is even feasible, and that the Federal govt. has the right to create such a mandate. I don't believe we have enough data to know the efficacy of masks, especially handmade masks out in the field. Mass enforcement of mask wearing, even if it was somehow cost affordable to task law enforcement with, would likely be met with heavy protest or open revolt in the United States by various civil rights groups. There's nothing wrong with being concerned about safety, especially these days. However, it's not so simple as 'pass a mask law', and if you really think about it ... there's a silver lining there. Do you want to be ruled by a government who can tell you what to wear, when to wear it, how to wear it — even if you dissent? Once there is a precedent for a national mask law, the Federal government can use that to push for further loss of freedoms for individuals and states. I'm not saying the mask law concept is intentionally being pushed to erode freedoms, rather, that it has the potential to do so. Businesses can already refuse service for any reason not protected by Federal/State law. That's plenty of grounds to kick out a non mask wearer. I don't see the need for additional laws, enforcement, or government spending. Let businesses and employees decide the level of risk they are willing to take.
mensetmanusman 6y ago
Enough research is showing that aerosol covid is a major risk. If they weren’t wearing N95 masks...
hogFeast 6y ago
Correct, which is why I didn't say that no-one should be worried. I am saying that this doesn't apply for most people in most situations. And you want a national mandate to wear masks but you said that people wearing them got infected. Interesting take.

BoxFour 6y ago

something like 1/3 to 1/2 of the US is obese, so...

clairity 6y ago

moreover, many office workers, those with seats roughly 6 feet apart or with a partition of some sort, don't even need the mask. the people who need masks are front-line workers of all sorts, from grocery clerks to medical workers, who interact with strangers for extended periods of time, not people sitting at computers for most of the day. sure, when you have a meeting, wear a mask, but an LED screen won't give you covid.

saltminer 6y ago
If everyone in the office is clean, sure, but what about the HVAC technician you had to call in? The UPS driver who interacted with the mail room employees? What if your cube neighbor is exposed by a family member who is asymptomatic and ends up spreading it to half the row before they get their results back? Unless you want to test your employees every day and hope the test is accurate, you need masks.
- clairity 6y ago
  no, none of those potential exposures are significant enough to warrant anything more than some distance. the virus falls to the ground and dies (even in the air) in droves all by itself. these aren't hardy viruses. you'd need to take an unnecessary risk like eating lunch in a group to create a significant exposure in that environment.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  What my company has said (when the office is currently slated to reopen in September) is that you need to wear a mask while walking around the office or talking to people, but not when you're sitting at your desk/computer. Our seating arrangements will be laid out such that everyone's desk has at least six feet of space. I'm... not sure... whether the science on this holds up, but it struck me as a good compromise. People expressed concern that wearing a mask for nine hours straight, without any breaks, would become very uncomfortable.