If you’re certain to get it anyway then the only thing you have control over is when you get it and who you give it to.
Sometimes, you can’t be both accurate and efficient. The masses aren’t intellectually equipped to be accurate about science on their own, but we can encourage them to be more efficient by relying on expert opinion.
I see getting people to trust the experts on coronavirus as related to the problem of getting people to trust the experts about vaccinations or climate change.
The guidance list for schools transforms them into a prison. The prairies are opening back up a little but I still doubt you see schools being open in September even in places that have a few dozen active cases as of today like MB/SK.
I agree with you here on some of your points but am not sure I understand how your solution would work. Thinking through what to turn over to experts, or even which experts to trust, is a thought process. People have a strong desire for psychological autonomy. At least the sense of it. So I’m not sure teaching people to think less is what you want. Or it’s not what I’d want.
I’d want people better equipped to think through things. Like, you need to be able to think through where you have expertise and where you do not. Where you have an opinion and where you have an educated conclusion. Where you have an educated conclusion but still need to shut the fuck up when an actual expert disagrees with you.
But more than that, how to engage with such expertise and decide whether it is something you will defer to or whether it’s something with which you need to meaningfully and humbly engage.
tl;dr but we haven’t had a takeaway since quarantine and don’t intend to until things improve a lot.
otoh we don’t quarantine deliveries; just wash hands carefully afterwards. It’s about risk management.
1 Like
My work is probably just gonna do whatever the FAANGs do. Which is that.
Kind of funny because I have yet to even set foot in the office.
I assume this is complete bunk.
Here is the text of emergency order 3.21.20-EO-N-35-20. Nothing in it indicates that what is written in that memo is legal.
And here is the most recent Merced county covid update.
https://www.cityofmerced.org/Home/Components/News/News/1059/17
Nothing in there about benefits aside from “If you lost your job, apply for benefits immediately.”
Aside from that, I can’t even find this in the derposphere.
He seems to be a bot, likely Russian, or an insane Q follower.
And here is the department of social services debunking it.
1 Like
Here’s another round of ventilation calcs. “Personal exposure” is a quotient that reflects the amount you are exposing yourself to air other people have breathed by attending such an activity. “Event exposure” is the same quotient, but multiplied by the number of people at the event (the cumulative/public health risk of the event taking place). “Daily exposure” reflects for events that take place more than once per day (for instance, 3 groups of patrons at a restaurant all staying for one hour).
NYC Subway appears to be a major culprit.
Even mediocre social distancing at restaurants seems like it drastically reduces overall exposure. However, much of this is driven by the fact that fewer diners are exposed; it’s only about 1/3 as risky for each individual patron.
Grocery stores don’t stand out as particularly risky. The model assumes 3,200 people visit the store in a day, with about as much cumulative risk to society as two restaurants being open.
Outdoor dining appears vastly superior to indoor dining, even if it’s not socially distanced.
Offices seem like high exposure, but this is a large population assumed (100k SF office). Cutting occupancy by 50% reduces the daily exposure by 75%.
(Obviously there are limitations to this analysis. There might be nonlinear relationships about amount of viral load it takes to get sick, or something like that. Also, if 1/2 of an office stays home from work, they’ll probably go to restaurants and salons or whatever an incur a greater risk there. But this is a reasonable apples-to-apples comparison for the risk to you and/or to society for xyz business being open under different guidelines.)
11 Likes
You hate to see it
Input the grocery store from the standpoint of a worker. It’s like they take the pooled risk of everyone that comes in. Particularly customer facing staff and instacart workers in the aisle.
If 10 checkouts then 10% of customers come near you. If instacart going up and down aisles then you are crossing close to 100% of people’s paths or at least airspace.
Solid approach.
I sense within me the potential for a derail exploring the idea of the division of intellectual labor.
Given where the US is right now, I think it would be a net positive to encourage non-scientists to default towards trusting scientists about matters of science. Let them have their psychological autonomy in other areas.
Why are Worldometers numbers slightly higher than Johns Hopkins? CNN and I assume other outlets refer to the latter.
I’m not upset at all and I don’t want to mute you and I’m not asking you to stop. I was mostly just trying to understand your position because you seemed to be upset with other people making their own decisions about what’s worth taking a risk for while you go ahead and proceed with your own risks with getting weed and booze and dirt. It’s hard for me to understand that point of view for some reason.
I think when ChrisV says “take out is fine” I presume he means while taking reasonable precautions. Like I don’t think he is handling the packaging and then licking his fingers or rubbing his eyes.
But anyway the important thing is that I have no interest in stopping you from posting. Just trying to understand is all. And just expressing some disagreement with some of your viewpoints.
2 Likes
I’ve got a pizza stone that just gets fucking blistering hot. I put everything on it.
Lol people are nuts when it comes to ice cream. The local small-family run ice cream shop in town opened recently from being closed all winter. They had to take away their outdoor tables and tell people not to hang around the shop because like 50 people were jammed into a small green space area where it can get uncomfortable with like 25 people around. To be fair their ice cream is damn good
1 Like
Your family is on top of it.
I’m kinda hoping people haven’t been listening to experts honestly. The only thing experts have been consistent on is wash your hand and cover your cough. Otherwise it’s been a cluster of ridiculous contradictions from the start. I hope people listen to orders, like stay the fuck home or get fined. People like things simple and scientists very rarely talk in absolutes. If anything we need to elect smart people who will turn scientific we aren’t 100% sure babble into good policy.
3 Likes
Based on my model, grocery store workers are surprisingly low risk. About 10% of the risk per shift as an employee at a social-distanced restaurant. However, I must caution this is just ambient; grocery store workers probably mainly incur risk from face to face contact, rather than ambient air.
You wanna know who is high risk? Uber drivers. Even under pretty conservative assumptions, each shift crunches out to like a month of working at the grocery store. Of course, rolling windows down, wearing a mask, etc would all help quite a bit. But still, NOT a good line of work at all for this.
If bars were allowed to open and be crowded, it would be roughly as dangerous to be a bartender, if your ventilation wasn’t great (I’m sure many places are well under code for this).
House parties are also very risky for all involved. You’re sharing way more air with people at a house party than you would in most public settings. Attending a house party with 10 people is about as dangerous as going to a crowded, poorly ventilated bar. And worse, probably nobody is wearing masks at house parties.
The moral of the story, hang out outside. We should practically be encouraging it at this point, and warning people of the immense danger of meeting in other people’s private homes. That’s the unprotected sex of this whole situation.
1 Like
What are you doing with strawberries? For stuff with skin, I’ve been using soapy water to wash it off, then rinsing it well, but I’m thinking about going to a bleach/water solution. But I don’t know what to do with strawberries, given that they are kind of porous. I’ve also considered using ethyl alcohol (ethanol) for everything, instead. The WHO believes it should kill the novel coronavirus in under a minute, as it was effective against SARS and MERS in that amount of time. I believe the tests were 30 seconds, and the guideline is one minute to be safe.
Ethanol is not safe to consume a lot of, but if a small quantity was absorbed or didn’t rinse off it would be fine. I’m thinking of soaking everything in it for 60 seconds, then rinsing it off really well. My concern is just stuff like strawberries that could absorb it.
The CDC says just use plain water, but I’m not really that confident in their judgment on this…
Dang, you had my curiosity, but now you have my attention.
I think we are disagreeing about the language or perhaps I am being uselessly recursive. You say “encourage” and I’m like okay but there’s no way to remove a person’s autonomy and consent from that process, and least not humanely imo.
If you only teach people to be robots following orders when dealing with x/y/z, you leave a pretty easy vulnerability for bad faith experts.
If you teach people to meaningfully engage with that kind of deference, though, you will encounter far less (fewer?) problems from that person later on. That person now can apply this thinking when they encounter new evidence that challenges their assumed expertise in other domains.