4 ms·

Who are you talking about thinking that diseases were eradicated by masks? Public health people talking about low incidence of diseases being due to pandemic i

Who are you talking about thinking that diseases were eradicated by masks? Public health people talking about low incidence of diseases being due to pandemic isolation and masking almost certainly weren't implying that they were gone, more commenting that they were suppressed by those changes to behavior. I am kind of fascinated that there is so little call to do things like improve ventilation. There's some, but people haven't seemed to catch on that we could do things to reduce disease that cause ~no individual inconvenience. Or like send people home when they come to work with a cold, change that culture. For outbreaks, I doubt a few hundred cases of monkeypox (outside of the endemic areas) would have been such major news a couple years ago. It's largely an attention phenomenon. It is certainly something to keep an eye on, but it doesn't appear to be spreading uncontrollably. Democratic Republic of the Congo, one of the endemic areas, has more cases this year than the non-endemic areas.

rsynnott 4y ago
> I am kind of fascinated that there is so little call to do things like improve ventilation. There's some, but people haven't seemed to catch on that we could do things to reduce disease that cause ~no individual inconvenience. Some countries are actually putting significant resources into this. But if you're in a country that isn't, well, realistically, who is going to pay for it? Public health experts pretty much everywhere are saying that it should be done (mind you, they were saying that before covid, too; "proper ventilation would be beneficial" is hardly a new idea), but the only way it happens is through state funding.
- Swizec 4y ago
  > but the only way it happens is through state funding. Is it really that expensive to open a window? I remember even in the dead of winter our school would regularly open windows to let in some fresh air. And in the hot humid summers we would regularly keep open windows, no matter how hot it got outside, 25 kids inside would make it way hotter. And smellier.
  - rsynnott 4y ago
    So in general when people talk about improved ventilation, they're _mostly_ not talking about opening a window (impractical in many places at certain times of year, anyway); they're talking about some sort of mechanical ventilation, particularly for large buildings. Improving that sort of thing is expensive.
- redisman 4y ago
  In (most?) building this would also mean replacing the HVAC system and ducts which would take months-years and close the building down for the maintenance period. I’m really not sure what the pitch is realistically.
  - maxerickson 4y ago
    How about systematically examining the current performance and likely retrofit cost of existing larger buildings? Then the discussion can be about a more specific cost (and time) estimate and include better information about the changes the updates would bring about. Or we could just assume it is too expensive and inconvenient to be worth looking into.
jeromegv 4y ago
Even at the height of the pandemic, it was quite frustrating to see so little public places taking easy measures like keeping the doors/windows open, but focusing so much energy on arrows on the floor or non-sense like that. Increased ventilation even helps with concentrating in school, as high CO2 is not good for schooling. I used to fall asleep all the time while I was in school, elementary, secondary, university, even staring at a computer. Now that I work from home, I never fall asleep that way. I was clearly just so tired from high CO2.
- toyg 4y ago
  In my experience, that sleepiness might also be due to forced sleep patterns, commuting, and heavy food - things that you likely experienced in school but not now.
- fullstop 4y ago
  > I never fall asleep that way. I was clearly just so tired from high CO2. I thought that Mass was just boring in elementary school. Perhaps there was more to it than that!
- ajmurmann 4y ago
  You put the arrows down once and the signs up once. Opening windows and doors and managing airflow is a constant effort. Installing better ventilation can get costly. Cheaper to just do the theater.
taeric 4y ago
It is more of a local feel, honestly. Many on twitter and around the schools I do go to seem convinced that if the rest of the nation had just been as good at masking as we were, they would have not had it as bad. And that if we are diligent in the future, we wouldn't have as severe of outbreaks. I can't even really say they are wrong. I don't know. My weight would be more on our 90%ish percent vaccination rate, but I could see both having impact. Edit: I'm actually somewhat skeptical that ventilation will work as well as folks hope. Living in a place that largely does rely on outside air, we had just as large of outbreaks as anyone else. (That is, it is common to have open windows here. The kid's schools are even made to take advantage of that, if I understand it correctly.) Again, I am /not/ saying it is wrong. I just doubt it weighs as heavily as portrayed.
- maxerickson 4y ago
  What is your definition of "work"? Of course better ventilation won't outright stop diseases from spreading, the point is that it will reduce the spread with reasonable cost and little downside (like another commenter mentions, if the existing ventilation isn't keeping up with CO2 concentrations, there can be other benefits).
  - taeric 4y ago
    From what I saw with our schools.... it didn't really cut the spread. Estimates are that the school had just as high of spread as elsewhere. And that is with near 100% vaccination of the kids in said school. I should note I'm not against trying. It seems a low hanging fruit to reach for. Just, evidence has shown that this particular disease goes for saturation fairly effectively.
    - jeromegv 4y ago
      Which evidence? You just quoted absolutely zero evidence beside your own personal anecdotes. It's an airborne disease. Better aeration definitely helps with airborne diseases, multiple studies prove it. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17257148/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17257148/ But of course, COVID spreads so easily that this can reach the limit (especially Omicron) and in an environment where kids will interact together in all kind of ways, but this would have definitely helped a lot more in the first few waves (pre-omicron) without needing to shut down schools entirely.
ajmurmann 4y ago
There are also other, novel things we could do to fight infectious diseases that get pretty much no traction. Far-range UVC lights immediately come to mind. These kill viruses and single-celled organisms quickly while not harming humans. Just imagine this installed in all public, closed spaces! Schools, offices, restaurants, public transit all could be heavily reduced in how well any infectious diseases gets spread there. Yet, this is almost entirely absent from public discourse. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67211-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67211-2
- nradov 4y ago
  Beware of unintended consequences. Humans evolved with constant exposure to pathogens. Living in overly sterile environments seems to be a risk factor for autoimmune disorders.
  - ajmurmann 4y ago
    I wonder if we could address this by not activating the lights everywhere all the time. Always on in hospitals and other places with vulnerable people. Only on in restaurants and public transit during time of increased thread like a pandemic or maybe flu season, since that in fact kills a lot of people.
Izkata 4y ago
> I am kind of fascinated that there is so little call to do things like improve ventilation. There's some, but people haven't seemed to catch on that we could do things to reduce disease that cause ~no individual inconvenience. People still think SARS-CoV-2 spreads by droplets, so in their minds things like that wouldn't do anything.
argonaut 4y ago
You didn't see many scientists saying this. But early on in the pandemic many people were saying Covid would be completely over if everyone masked for a month, or if we locked down for a month, etc. I saw this a lot within my own network of very liberal, twenty-something peers. Some people still believe this, albeit probably a small minority now.
- dv_dt 4y ago
  But it was over in multiple nations that did take the precautions seriously ... only to come back when they somehow were convinced to relax the recommendations.
- scotty79 4y ago
  > But early on in the pandemic many people were saying Covid would be completely over if everyone masked for a month, or if we locked down for a month, It's technically true if every single person on Earth did this at the same time. Which is impossible, so no.
  - taeric 4y ago
    Is it, though? Feels unlikely that we could eliminate any corona virus that way.

rsynnott 4y ago

> I am kind of fascinated that there is so little call to do things like improve ventilation. There's some, but people haven't seemed to catch on that we could do things to reduce disease that cause ~no individual inconvenience. Some countries are actually putting significant resources into this. But if you're in a country that isn't, well, realistically, who is going to pay for it? Public health experts pretty much everywhere are saying that it should be done (mind you, they were saying that before covid, too; "proper ventilation would be beneficial" is hardly a new idea), but the only way it happens is through state funding.

Swizec 4y ago
> but the only way it happens is through state funding. Is it really that expensive to open a window? I remember even in the dead of winter our school would regularly open windows to let in some fresh air. And in the hot humid summers we would regularly keep open windows, no matter how hot it got outside, 25 kids inside would make it way hotter. And smellier.
- rsynnott 4y ago
  So in general when people talk about improved ventilation, they're _mostly_ not talking about opening a window (impractical in many places at certain times of year, anyway); they're talking about some sort of mechanical ventilation, particularly for large buildings. Improving that sort of thing is expensive.
redisman 4y ago
In (most?) building this would also mean replacing the HVAC system and ducts which would take months-years and close the building down for the maintenance period. I’m really not sure what the pitch is realistically.
- maxerickson 4y ago
  How about systematically examining the current performance and likely retrofit cost of existing larger buildings? Then the discussion can be about a more specific cost (and time) estimate and include better information about the changes the updates would bring about. Or we could just assume it is too expensive and inconvenient to be worth looking into.

jeromegv 4y ago

Even at the height of the pandemic, it was quite frustrating to see so little public places taking easy measures like keeping the doors/windows open, but focusing so much energy on arrows on the floor or non-sense like that. Increased ventilation even helps with concentrating in school, as high CO2 is not good for schooling. I used to fall asleep all the time while I was in school, elementary, secondary, university, even staring at a computer. Now that I work from home, I never fall asleep that way. I was clearly just so tired from high CO2.

toyg 4y ago
In my experience, that sleepiness might also be due to forced sleep patterns, commuting, and heavy food - things that you likely experienced in school but not now.
fullstop 4y ago
> I never fall asleep that way. I was clearly just so tired from high CO2. I thought that Mass was just boring in elementary school. Perhaps there was more to it than that!
ajmurmann 4y ago
You put the arrows down once and the signs up once. Opening windows and doors and managing airflow is a constant effort. Installing better ventilation can get costly. Cheaper to just do the theater.

taeric 4y ago

It is more of a local feel, honestly. Many on twitter and around the schools I do go to seem convinced that if the rest of the nation had just been as good at masking as we were, they would have not had it as bad. And that if we are diligent in the future, we wouldn't have as severe of outbreaks. I can't even really say they are wrong. I don't know. My weight would be more on our 90%ish percent vaccination rate, but I could see both having impact. Edit: I'm actually somewhat skeptical that ventilation will work as well as folks hope. Living in a place that largely does rely on outside air, we had just as large of outbreaks as anyone else. (That is, it is common to have open windows here. The kid's schools are even made to take advantage of that, if I understand it correctly.) Again, I am /not/ saying it is wrong. I just doubt it weighs as heavily as portrayed.

maxerickson 4y ago
What is your definition of "work"? Of course better ventilation won't outright stop diseases from spreading, the point is that it will reduce the spread with reasonable cost and little downside (like another commenter mentions, if the existing ventilation isn't keeping up with CO2 concentrations, there can be other benefits).
- taeric 4y ago
  From what I saw with our schools.... it didn't really cut the spread. Estimates are that the school had just as high of spread as elsewhere. And that is with near 100% vaccination of the kids in said school. I should note I'm not against trying. It seems a low hanging fruit to reach for. Just, evidence has shown that this particular disease goes for saturation fairly effectively.
  - jeromegv 4y ago
    Which evidence? You just quoted absolutely zero evidence beside your own personal anecdotes. It's an airborne disease. Better aeration definitely helps with airborne diseases, multiple studies prove it. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17257148/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17257148/ But of course, COVID spreads so easily that this can reach the limit (especially Omicron) and in an environment where kids will interact together in all kind of ways, but this would have definitely helped a lot more in the first few waves (pre-omicron) without needing to shut down schools entirely.

ajmurmann 4y ago

There are also other, novel things we could do to fight infectious diseases that get pretty much no traction. Far-range UVC lights immediately come to mind. These kill viruses and single-celled organisms quickly while not harming humans. Just imagine this installed in all public, closed spaces! Schools, offices, restaurants, public transit all could be heavily reduced in how well any infectious diseases gets spread there. Yet, this is almost entirely absent from public discourse. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67211-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67211-2

nradov 4y ago
Beware of unintended consequences. Humans evolved with constant exposure to pathogens. Living in overly sterile environments seems to be a risk factor for autoimmune disorders.
- ajmurmann 4y ago
  I wonder if we could address this by not activating the lights everywhere all the time. Always on in hospitals and other places with vulnerable people. Only on in restaurants and public transit during time of increased thread like a pandemic or maybe flu season, since that in fact kills a lot of people.

Izkata 4y ago

> I am kind of fascinated that there is so little call to do things like improve ventilation. There's some, but people haven't seemed to catch on that we could do things to reduce disease that cause ~no individual inconvenience. People still think SARS-CoV-2 spreads by droplets, so in their minds things like that wouldn't do anything.

argonaut 4y ago

You didn't see many scientists saying this. But early on in the pandemic many people were saying Covid would be completely over if everyone masked for a month, or if we locked down for a month, etc. I saw this a lot within my own network of very liberal, twenty-something peers. Some people still believe this, albeit probably a small minority now.

dv_dt 4y ago
But it was over in multiple nations that did take the precautions seriously ... only to come back when they somehow were convinced to relax the recommendations.
scotty79 4y ago
> But early on in the pandemic many people were saying Covid would be completely over if everyone masked for a month, or if we locked down for a month, It's technically true if every single person on Earth did this at the same time. Which is impossible, so no.
- taeric 4y ago
  Is it, though? Feels unlikely that we could eliminate any corona virus that way.